:00:00. > :00:25.Today on The Big Questions: War - is it ever just?
:00:26. > :00:32.Good morning. I'm Nicky Campbell, welcome to The Big Questions. We're
:00:33. > :00:39.back at Oasis Academy in Media City UK, Salford, to debate one very big
:00:40. > :00:43.question. Is war ever just? Now, this year, it will be 100 years
:00:44. > :00:47.since the start of World War One, dubbed "the war to end all wars".
:00:48. > :00:50.Well, it proved to be anything but. Over the past century, British
:00:51. > :00:53.troops have fought across Europe, the Far East, the Middle East, on
:00:54. > :00:56.former British territories and in Northern Ireland and the Falklands.
:00:57. > :01:01.They are still fighting in Afghanistan. Military methods may
:01:02. > :01:04.have changed from trench warfare to aerial bombing and now to drone
:01:05. > :01:09.attacks, but the ethical basis should have remained the same - just
:01:10. > :01:13.warfare. It is a principle first established by St Augustine in 400
:01:14. > :01:21.AD and now enshrined in the UN Charter and the four Geneva
:01:22. > :01:23.Conventions. But is war ever just? To debate that question, we have
:01:24. > :01:26.assembled a very distinguished front row of military men, philosophers,
:01:27. > :01:32.historians, people of faith, anti-war campaigners and political
:01:33. > :01:34.commentators. You can have your say via Twitter or online, just log on
:01:35. > :01:40.to bbc.co.uk/thebigquestions, where you'll find links to continue the
:01:41. > :01:42.discussion online. And there'll be lots of encouragement and
:01:43. > :01:48.contributions from our very lively Salford audience.
:01:49. > :01:57.Bruce Kent, from the Movement for the Abolition of War. You've been an
:01:58. > :02:03.anti-war campaigner for so long now, and so passionately. And you were a
:02:04. > :02:10.soldier as well. Are there any circumstances in which war can be
:02:11. > :02:17.just? Today, war is meant to be the absolute last resort before anything
:02:18. > :02:18.can be called "just". We have so many mechanisms, negotiation,
:02:19. > :02:22.settlement, United Nations, European Union. So many means of settling
:02:23. > :02:29.matters, I don't think a war today can ever be just within the terms of
:02:30. > :02:33.just war. What about wars of the 20th century? The Second World War
:02:34. > :02:37.and the fight against German tyranny, Nazi tyranny? Well, yes
:02:38. > :02:41.indeed, the history... But what were we doing with Germany before the
:02:42. > :02:45.war? We were selling arms material to Hitler up to July 1939. We never
:02:46. > :02:50.opposed his moving into the Rhineland in 1936, I think it was.
:02:51. > :02:55.We did our best to ruin the United Nations, the League of Nations
:02:56. > :02:59.disarmament conference in 1932. There were so many opportunities to
:03:00. > :03:03.actually stop Hitler in his tracks long before. We didn't do it for
:03:04. > :03:06.Mussolini when he invaded Ethiopia, we didn't do that, we didn't do
:03:07. > :03:10.anything about Germany supporting Franco of Spain. We let Hitler in
:03:11. > :03:18.and then at the last minute we say, "Oh, what can we do?" And that's too
:03:19. > :03:22.late at that stage. Is this not hindsight? We were where we were in
:03:23. > :03:26.1939, our country was threatened. This was a heinous regime doing acts
:03:27. > :03:34.so despicable, they're almost beyond comprehension. If we had not gone to
:03:35. > :03:43.war, surely that would have given them even more licence. 50 million
:03:44. > :03:46.people at least died in that war. Was that balance equal to whatever
:03:47. > :03:49.we were supposed to be defending? We weren't defending the Jews, we were
:03:50. > :03:53.actually stopping the Jews from coming here. We kind of invented
:03:54. > :03:56.reasons for the war as the war went on. And I think we could have
:03:57. > :03:59.negotiated and we should have negotiated a settlement in that
:04:00. > :04:02.conflict. General Tim Cross, before I ask you questions about your own
:04:03. > :04:06.Christianity and your own position, respond to Bruce Kent. Well, I know
:04:07. > :04:10.Bruce well and I know his views. I just don't happen to agree with
:04:11. > :04:14.them. I think, you know, we live in an unjust world, warfare is not new.
:04:15. > :04:17.It's been around since Adam was a lad. Nobody's in favour of war, I
:04:18. > :04:21.think his organisation to abolish war is absolutely a great ambition,
:04:22. > :04:24.but it's like deciding you want to do away with sin. It's like
:04:25. > :04:28.declaring war on terror. It's a great idea but it isn't going to
:04:29. > :04:32.succeed. So we live in the world we live in, we live in an unjust world
:04:33. > :04:35.and a fallen world, from a Christian perspective, and I think there are
:04:36. > :04:39.times when force is necessary. I think there are times when force is
:04:40. > :04:42.necessary inside a nation through the actions to police forces,
:04:43. > :04:45.sometimes they need to use force and sometimes on the international scene
:04:46. > :04:48.we need to use force. So ultimately, although it should always be
:04:49. > :04:53.reluctant and a just war criteria should always be a very key part of
:04:54. > :05:00.what goes on, at the end of the day, I think there are times when war is
:05:01. > :05:06.justified. I invite you to come back if you like. Well, nobody is saying
:05:07. > :05:09.that at some stage we maybe need physical strength against other
:05:10. > :05:13.people. That's why we have a police force. Thank God we do have one.
:05:14. > :05:16.When we set up the United Nations, the first aim to save succeeding
:05:17. > :05:22.generations from the scourge of war, and a mechanism was set up about how
:05:23. > :05:25.to deal with conflict. And we have ignored those mechanisms - whether
:05:26. > :05:28.it's in Iraq or potentially in Iran or in Afghanistan, we've ignored
:05:29. > :05:32.those mechanisms and we have war. It's no good saying to your police
:05:33. > :05:36.force,"Do what you like, shoot anybody you want to." Police forces
:05:37. > :05:40.are meant to act under the law, and so are nation states, and that's
:05:41. > :05:44.what we're not doing. You became a Christian when you were a soldier.
:05:45. > :05:49.Part of, as some would put it, "a war machine". Did you feel in any
:05:50. > :05:58.way that your Christianity was compromised? Well, I became a
:05:59. > :06:02.Christian when I was 30, I was a Captain at the time serving with the
:06:03. > :06:06.United Nations in Cyprus. And for about two or three years, I thought
:06:07. > :06:09.through the issue about whether I should stay or whether I should
:06:10. > :06:13.leave. I can talk you through the process, but in simple terms, a
:06:14. > :06:16.couple of sort of bullet points. One is I think the British Army without
:06:17. > :06:20.any Christians in it would be a worse place, not a better place. I
:06:21. > :06:23.think The Bible tell us that people who become Christians should not
:06:24. > :06:26.immediately leave their professions, they should work their way through.
:06:27. > :06:29.The Biblical examples of centurions, there are four examples in the New
:06:30. > :06:32.Testament of interactions with centurions, including one by Jesus
:06:33. > :06:35.Himself. And He says, "I've never met faith like this anywhere in
:06:36. > :06:39.Israel." The soldiers going to John the Baptist to be baptised - he
:06:40. > :06:42.doesn't tell them to leave, he tells them, I always think rather sadly,
:06:43. > :06:46.to be content with their pay. But what he's actually saying is don't
:06:47. > :06:49.misuse your power and your force. So over time, studying the Scriptures,
:06:50. > :06:52.talking to people I respected and indeed through my own prayer life
:06:53. > :06:55.and the circumstances of being promoted, getting to the Staff
:06:56. > :06:59.College at that time, convinced me I should stay. And I would say that in
:07:00. > :07:02.staying, I've then been in positions where my Christian faith, I think,
:07:03. > :07:06.has been very important, crucially important indeed, in the way I've
:07:07. > :07:09.reacted to events in the Balkans, in Kosovo and Iraq and other places.
:07:10. > :07:14.You're still, obviously, by definition, willing to kill. Yep.
:07:15. > :07:21.Thou Shalt not Kill. Thou Shalt not Murder. That's what the Commandments
:07:22. > :07:25.actually say. State-authorised, Sovereign State. You read the
:07:26. > :07:28.Commandments in the Old Testament, the follow-on verses from the Ten
:07:29. > :07:33.Commandments have all sorts of instructions about killing. So I
:07:34. > :07:37.think the Ten Commandments is about not murdering, I don't do this on my
:07:38. > :07:39.own bat, it's under the authority of the nation, the state, the
:07:40. > :07:43.democratically elected government, in a democratic country. I don't
:07:44. > :07:47.decide whether I'm going to go to Macedonia or Kosovo or Iraq, it's
:07:48. > :07:50.the nation that sends me, and I operate under the authority of the
:07:51. > :07:53.nation state or, indeed, under the United Nations authority, as Bruce
:07:54. > :08:00.quite rightly, says in today's world. Symon Hill. I just saw you
:08:01. > :08:05.reacting to the "thou salt not kill" point. Well, Tim's point about the
:08:06. > :08:12.nation state, as a Christian, I became a Christian after reading
:08:13. > :08:16.Jesus's teaching. Very radical stuff all about the Kingdom of God. As
:08:17. > :08:20.Christians, we're called to follow the Kingdom of God. Jesus proclaimed
:08:21. > :08:23.a different power, a higher and subtler power than the powers of
:08:24. > :08:29.violence and greed which dominate our world. And to give up my own
:08:30. > :08:33.conscience and say, "Well, it's not my decision, it's the nation state,"
:08:34. > :08:40.I find that - not just for a Christian but for anyone - a sort of
:08:41. > :08:44.abrogation of your own conscience. There are no circumstances under
:08:45. > :08:47.which you think it is necessary not to murder, but to kill for your
:08:48. > :08:55.country or indeed to protect your brothers and sisters globally? For
:08:56. > :08:59.example, UN troops in Bosnia felt that their hands were tied when they
:09:00. > :09:02.saw people before their eyes being massacred and they were not able to
:09:03. > :09:04.respond. There are certainly situations in which I think
:09:05. > :09:10.responding with violence is entirely understandable. I think that's
:09:11. > :09:13.different to being just. I certainly don't condemn someone for resorting
:09:14. > :09:18.to violence in extreme circumstances I don't face. But the reality is, in
:09:19. > :09:21.war, often the people who are hit are not the aggressors, they're not
:09:22. > :09:25.the oppressors, they're ordinary civilians. The Holocaust didn't
:09:26. > :09:29.justify the mass bombing of German civilians. The atrocities committed
:09:30. > :09:35.by Japan in World War Two don't justify the atomic bombs on
:09:36. > :09:38.Hiroshima and Nagasaki. The people who die as a result of war are not
:09:39. > :09:42.the aggressors, they're not the oppressors. They're ordinary people
:09:43. > :09:47.who happen, through no fault of their own, to be born the wrong
:09:48. > :09:51.nationality. Peter Lee. Yes, when it comes to this argument about can war
:09:52. > :09:55.be just, we've seen here what often happens, we see a caricature of just
:09:56. > :09:58.war where on one side you have claims that you have a simple
:09:59. > :10:04.decision to make between doing good and doing evil. And if you're doing
:10:05. > :10:09.violence, you're doing evil and if you choose the non-violent way,
:10:10. > :10:13.you're doing good. That is an over-simplification of the Augustian
:10:14. > :10:16.or anyone else's argument. It is always, in a just war tradition, or
:10:17. > :10:20.it should be seen as, choosing between a greater evil and a lesser
:10:21. > :10:23.evil. Because there is no simple choice between choosing pacifism. I
:10:24. > :10:26.deeply respect the pacifist tradition, but to be able to stand
:10:27. > :10:29.back and watch someone innocent being massacred, someone mugged in
:10:30. > :10:32.the High Street, terrible things done, and say, "I choose a
:10:33. > :10:42.non-violent way, that's the right way," I think that's a heinous moral
:10:43. > :10:46.choice. Bruce Kent. That's deeply unfair. No-one has put forward the
:10:47. > :10:49.pacifist position in the way you're saying it. Of course I'd protect
:10:50. > :10:53.anybody who is being beaten up on the street. So you're wrong to use
:10:54. > :10:57.violence then? You're wrong to use force Of course I'd use force.
:10:58. > :11:01.That's what the police force is about. Under what rule does that
:11:02. > :11:04.force apply? And in nation states, they're bound by certain rules which
:11:05. > :11:10.they constantly ignore. Tony Blair for one. We'll get on to that later.
:11:11. > :11:13.This is a game of tennis and there's referee in the middle saying,
:11:14. > :11:17."Right, gentlemen, let's play nicely," what if one of them doesn't
:11:18. > :11:21.want to play nicely? What if Hitler doesn't want to sit down and talk to
:11:22. > :11:24.you? What if Gadaffi doesn't want to talk to you? German civilians are
:11:25. > :11:28.not Hitler. It's like saying somebody comes to attack me and you
:11:29. > :11:31.say what would I do? I wouldn't go and attack his children. Hitler came
:11:32. > :11:36.to power in a democracy. The German people had something to do with him
:11:37. > :11:39.gaining his position. So you think that justifies killing German
:11:40. > :11:46.civilians? I've not said anything about killing German civilians.
:11:47. > :11:50.Let's stick with German civilians, if I may, Nicky. We bombed Germany
:11:51. > :11:53.in World War Two and we committed heinous, heinous crimes as a
:11:54. > :11:59.country. I think we did terrible things. What was the option? We
:12:00. > :12:03.could not do all the things that you'd love to do? I get what you're
:12:04. > :12:07.saying, it's a lesser evil? We embrace a lesser evil to a greater
:12:08. > :12:11.evil. It boils down to the lesser of two evils, that's what it boils down
:12:12. > :12:14.to. Yes. It's still evil though, it was still evil, but it was the
:12:15. > :12:18.lesser of two evils. General Tim, I'll come to you in a second. I can
:12:19. > :12:22.see you're wanting to come back. But I want to speak to the Reverend
:12:23. > :12:27.Doctor Andrew Francis from the Mennonite Trust, a peace church. Now
:12:28. > :12:30.you believe there are never any circumstances whatsoever for
:12:31. > :12:34.violence. We believe that as part of a historic peace church movement, we
:12:35. > :12:38.follow the way of Jesus, who told us to turn the other cheek. He went to
:12:39. > :12:42.suffering to death on a cross at the hands of a very cruel punishment. We
:12:43. > :12:46.follow that way of Jesus. We're not seeking martyrdom ourselves. But we
:12:47. > :12:53.aren't prepared, as a movement, to be part of something that sanctions
:12:54. > :13:01.the bombing of civilians. We're not prepared to enter into violence as
:13:02. > :13:05.the way forward. Andrew, what if that were to save lives? As, it is
:13:06. > :13:09.argued, was the case in Kosovo, when those civilians were being
:13:10. > :13:14.terrorised? Or, indeed, shamefully, we did not intervene in Rwanda as
:13:15. > :13:17.millions were killed in a holocaust. Now, had there been military
:13:18. > :13:23.intervention and had hundreds of thousands of lives been saved, would
:13:24. > :13:27.that not have been justified? For us, we would not have got that far
:13:28. > :13:30.because we actually believe there are alternative means that Bruce
:13:31. > :13:35.Kent has already outlined, that Symon Hill has referred to. How
:13:36. > :13:39.would you have stopped the tribal conflict? I think tribal conflict is
:13:40. > :13:44.something different to the kind of questions about just war that you
:13:45. > :13:47.are proposing. I'm not trying to split hairs here, you have referred
:13:48. > :13:50.in your introduction to what is going on under the terms of the
:13:51. > :13:57.Geneva Convention, which enshrines just war, that goes back through
:13:58. > :14:01.Aquinas to Augustine. The whole principle is that it's legitimate
:14:02. > :14:03.authorities waging war. Now, we have to accept that there are
:14:04. > :14:10.circumstances where violence will occur in this world. One thing that
:14:11. > :14:14.we would need to say as Mennonites is that often, the Mennonite Relief
:14:15. > :14:18.Agency were some of the first people on the scene after the bombing at
:14:19. > :14:22.9/11. They took the role in North America that the Salvation Army
:14:23. > :14:26.often takes in this country. You would have been able to get the
:14:27. > :14:30.Tutsis and the Hutus, the two tribes, around the table and get
:14:31. > :14:36.them to work it all out? I said you wanted to come back to this. Yes,
:14:37. > :14:41.the start of that point was about Jesus and I love the scriptures. I
:14:42. > :14:44.know the Bible very well. But that would be the same pacifist Jesus who
:14:45. > :14:47.trashed the temple, who turned over tables, who resorted to force and
:14:48. > :14:51.violence. That violence can actually be non-violence. He wasn't hurting
:14:52. > :14:55.people. And you know that? All right, so if I go into a shop and
:14:56. > :14:59.trash the place, that's non-violent? I believe it is violent, You're just
:15:00. > :15:03.disputing whether someone may or may not have been involved in it. It was
:15:04. > :15:07.definite use of force at that time to put a political point. Force but
:15:08. > :15:10.not violence. Pacifism isn't about being passive, it's about actively
:15:11. > :15:13.being non-violent. Resisting injustice, like Jesus did, actively,
:15:14. > :15:19.but a table doesn't have feelings. Overturning a table is not a violent
:15:20. > :15:27.action. What about...? Tim, I promise I will come to you. Let's
:15:28. > :15:30.take it to the personal. What if you were at home and a violent man got
:15:31. > :15:34.into your house and was threatening your wife and children, and the only
:15:35. > :15:43.way that you could counter that would be an extreme act of violence?
:15:44. > :15:48.Active resistance, as Symon's referred to, can mean restraint
:15:49. > :15:52.under the due process of the law. It doesn't mean actually hitting
:15:53. > :15:58.somebody. When we talk about just war, it is about the amount of
:15:59. > :16:01.force. Proportionately. Resisting with an appropriate level, so if
:16:02. > :16:06.somebody breaks into my house and he intends to commit violence to me and
:16:07. > :16:15.my loved ones, I am going to stand in the way of that person. Would you
:16:16. > :16:20.hit that person? No, I wouldn't. I wouldn't. I like to think that I
:16:21. > :16:25.wouldn't. Nicky, I've never been faced with that. Tested, yes. And
:16:26. > :16:28.it's about that moment, and I have to believe that I will have the
:16:29. > :16:34.courage, in that moment, and the grace to act in the way that my
:16:35. > :16:38.belief demands that I should. Helen, I want to talk to you, actually, on
:16:39. > :16:43.the whole concept of a just war and how it came about, but make your
:16:44. > :16:47.point first. I find it hard to see why that would be considered the
:16:48. > :16:51.moral choice, to let someone come in and, say, murder your children and
:16:52. > :16:56.to do nothing. I find it hard to see why you think of that as being a
:16:57. > :16:59.graceful response. And also I think it's a mistake to say proportionate
:17:00. > :17:03.force is only resistance. That's just not true. Proportionate force
:17:04. > :17:06.is judged in terms of what this person's proposing to do to your
:17:07. > :17:15.wife and children and if they're going to kill your wife and children
:17:16. > :17:19.then proportionate force is lethal? -- lethal defence. And I find it
:17:20. > :17:23.really hard to reconcile your duties as a parent, for example, in the
:17:24. > :17:26.special duty you have to protect your child with this refusal to
:17:27. > :17:30.prevent them from being murdered if it's within your power to do so. I
:17:31. > :17:34.can protect my child from being bullied, I can protect my child from
:17:35. > :17:36.people in particular ways by using active resistance, by using not
:17:37. > :17:40.violent means, by actually just standing with a chair at the top of
:17:41. > :17:47.a set of stairs you can actually stop somebody getting... You can
:17:48. > :17:50.think of one scenario in which that's sufficient, but we can easily
:17:51. > :17:57.think of others in which the guy's got a gun and that's not sufficient.
:17:58. > :18:00.Or a knife. I have to say that our position would lead us naturally to
:18:01. > :18:14.the acceptance that it is better to kill - better to be killed than to
:18:15. > :18:18.kill. That would be where our historic peace church witnesses. And
:18:19. > :18:21.the Quakers as well. We do a tremendous amount of work with the
:18:22. > :18:25.Quakers, we share so many common platforms, and what we would have to
:18:26. > :18:29.say is that if that takes us unto death in terms of our wives and our
:18:30. > :18:33.children as well, which is part of our history, which has been tragic
:18:34. > :18:37.at the hands of others, we may have to accept that. You may have to
:18:38. > :18:41.accept that. I want to ask Helen here, because I think we should make
:18:42. > :18:44.clear, clarify this whole concept of just war, and why and how it came
:18:45. > :18:50.about under the aegis of Christianity. It does begin, as you
:18:51. > :18:53.said in the introduction, with Augustine. Augustine is tackling
:18:54. > :18:56.this question of, how do we reconcile the general Christian
:18:57. > :19:02.belief that it's wrong to kill people with Augustine's belief that
:19:03. > :19:07.there could be just wars? And he decides that the way in which we can
:19:08. > :19:10.do this is by conceiving of wars as a way of punishing aggression,
:19:11. > :19:18.because if aggression is a sin, the punishment is a loving act. Was this
:19:19. > :19:24.because as Christians we're thinking about the salvation of our souls?
:19:25. > :19:27.But there was a dilemma that we were discussing with Tim earlier on. They
:19:28. > :19:32.had this "thou shalt not kill" in the back of their minds. How are we
:19:33. > :19:36.going to get round this one? Is that what it was? It's partly that. It's
:19:37. > :19:39.also partly the question of Christian teachings about, for
:19:40. > :19:43.example, people getting what they deserve. A lot of Christianity is to
:19:44. > :19:46.do with getting into Heaven if you behave Well, and if you behave badly
:19:47. > :19:49.then you will end up somewhere rather less pleasant, and yet war,
:19:50. > :19:53.inevitably, involves inflicting, as we've heard, massive harm on people
:19:54. > :19:56.that we would ordinarily think of as being innocent people. If you're
:19:57. > :19:59.Augustine and you're faced with this question, well, how could it be just
:20:00. > :20:03.that we engage in activities knowing that they're going to perpetrate
:20:04. > :20:06.these massive harms on people? And the way in which Augustine tried to
:20:07. > :20:10.solve this problem is by positing this notion of kind of collective
:20:11. > :20:13.guilt. And thinking that when a nation aggresses, you can view each
:20:14. > :20:17.member of that nation as in some way responsible, and so it's a very
:20:18. > :20:26.early just war theory, quite far removed from what we think of as
:20:27. > :20:29.just war theory these days. That has a very strong commitment to the
:20:30. > :20:33.principle of community. So Augustine starts out with the notion of just
:20:34. > :20:37.cause, but it's not until later that we start to get the broader just war
:20:38. > :20:46.theories which we divide up into principles that were suggested prior
:20:47. > :20:51.to the war. -- that judge justness. Tom Holland, while we are in the
:20:52. > :20:54.mists of history. Well, I think the origins of the notions of war are
:20:55. > :20:57.actually way back beyond Christianity because I think that
:20:58. > :21:00.the entire sweep of human history you see two contradictory human
:21:01. > :21:04.impulses embodied. One is instinctive recourse to violence.
:21:05. > :21:07.The oldest remains of homo sapiens show signs of having been scalped
:21:08. > :21:11.but on the other side there has always been a sense of anxiety about
:21:12. > :21:16.recourse to violence. Even in the early civilisations, you do not want
:21:17. > :21:19.to go to war if there is the risk of offending the gods, and essentially,
:21:20. > :21:24.to begin with, the gods were there as a kind of insurance policy. If
:21:25. > :21:28.they are happy with you, then it is safe to go to war. But gradually
:21:29. > :21:32.over the course of time, that concept is moralised and so the
:21:33. > :21:35.great Persian king Dorias I in the fifth century BC, he tells his
:21:36. > :21:39.soldiers it is legitimate to go and attack this enemy because they have
:21:40. > :21:46.offended the great god and those of you who die in battle will go to
:21:47. > :21:48.Heaven. In the Roman Empire, the Romans had the conviction, and
:21:49. > :21:52.Cicero, this great inspiration to Augustine - he had this conviction
:21:53. > :21:55.that the Romans had never gone to war unjustly, that they had always
:21:56. > :22:02.gone to war either because they had been insulted or because they were
:22:03. > :22:06.defending their allies. And so you have this sort of wonderful notion
:22:07. > :22:12.that in fact the Romans conquered the world in self-defence.
:22:13. > :22:17.LAUGHTER So to take this from a just war,
:22:18. > :22:21.this is a self-justification war. The Romans wouldn't say so. The
:22:22. > :22:25.Romans would say... They're not here to answer. They would say the gods
:22:26. > :22:29.had blessed them and it was for the good of the conquered to be
:22:30. > :22:32.conquered. And that, of course, is a notion that has then fed into
:22:33. > :22:38.Christian and Muslim nations of imperialism as well. We will come
:22:39. > :22:41.onto that because you have written about it extensively, and, some
:22:42. > :22:45.would say, contentiously! So, can there be a just war? I'm glad that
:22:46. > :22:49.point's just been made because the tradition of just war is not just a
:22:50. > :22:52.Christian one but common to all major religions and non-religious
:22:53. > :22:56.traditions. And I think, yes, there clearly can be just wars and I think
:22:57. > :22:59.part of the problem with the discussion we've been having is the
:23:00. > :23:01.setting-up of full-on pacifism, people who don't believe in violence
:23:02. > :23:05.in any circumstances, against people supporting war in a multitude of
:23:06. > :23:08.circumstances. And I would say that war in genuine self-defence, in
:23:09. > :23:12.defence of your own territory, as Britain fought in 1914, that is a
:23:13. > :23:16.just war. I think it's a just war when people rise up against tyranny
:23:17. > :23:20.and foreign occupation and use arms against foreign occupation. That can
:23:21. > :23:24.be a just war although it's not always the right thing to do. And in
:23:25. > :23:27.certain circumstances, as in the case where under international law
:23:28. > :23:32.and the United Nations are fully endorsing a military campaign, that
:23:33. > :23:35.can be just. I think the problem is that the large majority of wars that
:23:36. > :23:38.are being fought today, particularly those that are involving Britain and
:23:39. > :23:43.the United States and their allies, have not been just wars. They have
:23:44. > :23:47.been disproportionate, they have been wars of aggression and wars of
:23:48. > :23:56.domination. I think that's what we need to... To discuss. Stephen. You
:23:57. > :24:01.twitched. I just want to pick up the point that has been made about some
:24:02. > :24:04.of the wars that are going on at the moment. What is not being addressed
:24:05. > :24:10.very often when we're engaging the war is the postbellum. What happens
:24:11. > :24:13.after the war. And the way in which the societies which have been
:24:14. > :24:17.victims, in a sense, of the wars that we've waged have actually been
:24:18. > :24:21.left, almost, to their own devices. That is a very good point and I want
:24:22. > :24:25.to explore that more in just a few minutes. But I think just while
:24:26. > :24:28.we're here, I'd like to look at the religious justifications, and I want
:24:29. > :24:32.to speak about the Muslim empire expansions in the Caliphate in a
:24:33. > :24:35.second, Tom. Usama, there are in all scriptures you can find, if you want
:24:36. > :24:38.to, justification for violence, justification for war, and I suppose
:24:39. > :24:46.the jihadist would point to the verses of the sword in the Koran.
:24:47. > :24:51.The idea of jihad is classically very similar to just war, actually.
:24:52. > :24:57.A holy war with a strong sense of ethics for that are. In fact,
:24:58. > :24:59.contemporary Muslim theologians agree with things like the Geneva
:25:00. > :25:04.Convention, international treaties etc. The problem with the jihadists
:25:05. > :25:07.is they are stuck in medieval concepts where it's very old school.
:25:08. > :25:11.It's "us versus them", it's "obliterate the enemy", it's "behead
:25:12. > :25:16.prisoners", etc. So they violate all kinds of modern international
:25:17. > :25:19.conventions. We saw the 7/7 terrorist on that video saying, "we
:25:20. > :25:23.are at war with you", and we had similar messages from the two men at
:25:24. > :25:27.Woolwich. They feel they have Koranic justification, don't they?
:25:28. > :25:30.Yes, of course they do, like all religious fundamentalists and
:25:31. > :25:33.extremists do. But the overwhelming mainstream Muslim theology on this
:25:34. > :25:38.is very clear that jihad must be underpinned by ethics and it's a
:25:39. > :25:42.necessary evil. The Prophet himself went to war as a last resort. This
:25:43. > :25:45.was always understood in classical Islam. War is sometimes,
:25:46. > :25:48.unfortunately, a necessary evil. But if we can eliminate war, Muslims
:25:49. > :25:59.would wholeheartedly welcome the abolition of war. One of the
:26:00. > :26:05.practical issues is, like the police force, you need and impartial police
:26:06. > :26:08.force to demilitarise society. If you want to demilitarise the world
:26:09. > :26:12.you need an international police force which is impartial, and we
:26:13. > :26:16.don't have that. The United States or Britain - one power cannot do
:26:17. > :26:20.that. As an honest broker? Exactly. And I think that's one of the issues
:26:21. > :26:26.for the next century for us to work to. When did martyrdom come into
:26:27. > :26:30.play? Tom Holland? It's very difficult to fight against an enemy
:26:31. > :26:36.who is willing to die. "We love death", all that stuff. Martyrdom is
:26:37. > :26:39.crucial to the evolution of the Christian Church and the famous
:26:40. > :26:43.phrase "the blood of the martyrs is the seed of the church". What is
:26:44. > :26:46.distinctive about the Christian conception of martyrdom is that it's
:26:47. > :26:50.essentially passive. You do not resist it. You go to Heaven
:26:51. > :26:53.willingly. Once the Roman Empire has become Christian, there then becomes
:26:54. > :26:57.a need to demonstrate your devotion to God in another way, and so you
:26:58. > :27:00.get the concept of monasticism, of aestheticism, and the monks who go
:27:01. > :27:03.out into the desert and mortify their flesh, cast themselves as
:27:04. > :27:07.soldiers of God. They see themselves engaged in spiritual warfare with
:27:08. > :27:10.the demons. What then very interestingly happens with Islam is
:27:11. > :27:13.that the Muslims look at the examples of the monks and they
:27:14. > :27:16.declare that jihad is the monasticism of Islam but they
:27:17. > :27:20.literalise what, in monasticism is a metaphor, so the soldiers of God, in
:27:21. > :27:23.early Islam, become literal soldiers of God and they go off to the
:27:24. > :27:34.frontier in Syria with the Byzantine Empire and they literally fight.
:27:35. > :27:42.What is the Koranic justification for martyrdom and for rewards for
:27:43. > :27:46.dying in battle? What is in that? The idea of martyrdom is about dying
:27:47. > :27:50.a noble death. Living a noble life and dying for a greater cause. Has
:27:51. > :27:55.that, in a sense, been misinterpreted? Oh, yes, absolutely.
:27:56. > :27:58.The suicide bombers and the crazy jihadists who kill civilians, mainly
:27:59. > :28:01.Muslim in the world, totally don't get this. And earlier on, in
:28:02. > :28:04.addition to what Tom said, the spiritual aspect of jihad, the
:28:05. > :28:07.greater jihad, was always understood as the struggle within your own soul
:28:08. > :28:12.against evil and the outer jihad again was a last resort of necessary
:28:13. > :28:16.evil. And Muslims especially, and others, have to recover the idea of
:28:17. > :28:19.an inner jihad, the greater jihad, which is bringing out the goodness
:28:20. > :28:24.of our humanity and resisting the evil within.
:28:25. > :28:31.APPLAUSE Go on, Tom, yes? There's a
:28:32. > :28:35.fascinating moment in the tenth century where the Byzantine Empire
:28:36. > :28:38.and the Caliphate are at war and the Byzantine emperor, who is a seasoned
:28:39. > :28:41.Saracen fighter, recognises that the teachings of Islam, that if you die
:28:42. > :28:46.justifiably in battle in the cause of Islam you will go to Heaven. This
:28:47. > :28:50.is tremendous in inspiring a sense of enthusiasm in battle for the
:28:51. > :28:53.soldiers that he's fighting against. And so he goes to the patriarch in
:28:54. > :28:57.Constantinople and essentially says, could you possibly rustle me up a
:28:58. > :29:02.doctrine that would enable me to tell my soldiers that if they die in
:29:03. > :29:06.battle... Because of a just war, could you rustle this up? "Could you
:29:07. > :29:09.rustle one up, please, so that my soldiers will then feel that
:29:10. > :29:13.fighting for our Christian empire, they will go to Heaven". And the
:29:14. > :29:17.patriarch turns round and says, "no, afraid not. And not only that, but
:29:18. > :29:20.if any of your soldiers kill people in battle, they'll have to do three
:29:21. > :29:25.years' penance". Were they not even offered absolution? They have to do
:29:26. > :29:28.the penance and then they get the absolution. And so the Byzantine
:29:29. > :29:31.model of Christianity, Imperial Christianity, was always very, very
:29:32. > :29:36.pacifist. Of course, at the same time in the Latin West, a different
:29:37. > :29:39.notion was evolving. And so that explains why the Crusades come from
:29:40. > :29:46.the Latin West and not from the Byzantine Greek Orthodox world. How
:29:47. > :29:50.fascinating. Let's speak, if we may, and, Tim, you want to make a point,
:29:51. > :29:54.but I want to move it on to discussion, if we can, about World
:29:55. > :30:03.War I. But Tim, you want a minute to make a point? Reasons for war, and
:30:04. > :30:07.how war is conducted. I think it is important to say, the Times put out
:30:08. > :30:12.an article in the 1930s asking what was wrong with the world and GK
:30:13. > :30:15.Chesterton said, "I am". We are all involved in this, we are all sinners
:30:16. > :30:21.and we need to keep that firmly in focus, this is not an ideological
:30:22. > :30:24.issue, this is about reality. My point about the distinction between
:30:25. > :30:27.killing and murdering is that individual people should not be
:30:28. > :30:31.going off and doing their own thing, and part of the just war criteria is
:30:32. > :30:37.do you go to war in the first place, under the authority, the sovereign
:30:38. > :30:40.authority of the United Nations. Bow sovereign states have sanctioned a
:30:41. > :30:43.terrible things. The other thing then is how you conduct warfare, and
:30:44. > :30:51.one of the point is that it was quite rightly is how you can --
:30:52. > :30:54.conduct war. One of the responsibilities of the United
:30:55. > :30:57.Nations is quite rightly saying we cannot stand by while people are
:30:58. > :31:01.massacred but that does not give you the authority to do bad things in an
:31:02. > :31:08.indiscriminate way. Let's get a couple of audience contributions. I
:31:09. > :31:11.would like to say to this gentleman that if somebody came into my house
:31:12. > :31:16.and started to attack my children and my wife and my dog, I would lie
:31:17. > :31:24.down and die for them and I think that is what everybody would do, but
:31:25. > :31:27.going on to what you just said, I am against war but if people are
:31:28. > :31:32.getting massacred in places like Syria and what has been going on in,
:31:33. > :31:35.say, Zimbabwe, surely there is justification for the United Nations
:31:36. > :31:39.to go in and stop that sort of thing? I am not saying that his walk
:31:40. > :31:46.I'm just saying that has to a dividing line -- that is war. And it
:31:47. > :31:50.may involve the use of force, inevitably. I think so and I
:31:51. > :31:54.disagree, those who say we should not be involved in these things have
:31:55. > :31:59.to answer the question, in simple terms. I built refugee camps in
:32:00. > :32:04.Kosovo, go and visit those in Turkey and other places around Syria and
:32:05. > :32:09.ask yourself, is this right? My answer is it isn't. Another
:32:10. > :32:13.gentleman. I would like to say to this gentleman, he mentioned that
:32:14. > :32:17.his religious sector has a very tragic history. Don't you think it
:32:18. > :32:22.will continue to be tragic if you just lay back and do not fight for
:32:23. > :32:34.your family in the case of a murderer coming into your home? You
:32:35. > :32:38.have a bit debate going here, you? Will move on to World War One in a
:32:39. > :32:43.moment, thank you for the opportunity to respond. I don't seek
:32:44. > :32:48.martyrdom, I don't seek... I love my partner dearly and I would die for
:32:49. > :32:54.her today, without being ever able to say I love you to her as she
:32:55. > :33:00.watches this live, I would die for her and I would die for her
:33:01. > :33:04.daughter, but my principles and I know my principles and I know hers,
:33:05. > :33:12.is that we do not want to inflict violence on anyone else and we have
:33:13. > :33:15.to accept that the way we live and work with our friends and moving
:33:16. > :33:20.groups and do community work, each of us, and the way we operate
:33:21. > :33:28.professionally in my writing and teaching live, I have to say I want
:33:29. > :33:35.people to engage more and more in dialogue to lift this issue are just
:33:36. > :33:42.well. I'm not aiming this at you and your producers and the bar has to be
:33:43. > :33:48.raised much higher. Bruce said at the outset of the programme, the
:33:49. > :33:56.reasons that went on with Hitler, the root causes, we didn't get on
:33:57. > :33:59.soon enough into that discussion. If you want to go to the First World
:34:00. > :34:04.War, you can say similar things about that. Does it's not remain the
:34:05. > :34:10.fact that there have always been bad people doing bad things. Or do we,
:34:11. > :34:16.collectively, you said we are all in this together, do we create these
:34:17. > :34:22.tyrants. I think we do to a large degree. If you look at the
:34:23. > :34:31.beginnings of that, there were not many people around here who do not
:34:32. > :34:35.think it was a just war. You have to see how people at the time saw this
:34:36. > :34:42.and reacted to it, so the decision to go to war with Germany over their
:34:43. > :34:49.invasion, there had been plenty of conversations beforehand, but none
:34:50. > :34:53.of the things that Bruce mentions about crisis management, but there
:34:54. > :34:58.were no people in this country who did not think it was not try to stop
:34:59. > :35:02.Germany after they invaded Poland and the whole Western Sobran system
:35:03. > :35:05.was in ways tied up in this, that it somebody invaded someone's sovereign
:35:06. > :35:13.state, we had to do something about it, hence we got involved in Iraq
:35:14. > :35:17.when they invaded Kuwait. So I don't think anyone saw anything other than
:35:18. > :35:22.World War One being just. Now, the numbers are people who died, how it
:35:23. > :35:29.was conducted 60 million deaths. Shore, and is it justified? I don't
:35:30. > :35:31.know, but I don't know if I am going to sit here and say we should have
:35:32. > :35:38.done nothing about Germany invading Belgium. I find that breathtaking,
:35:39. > :35:45.the First World War was in no way a just war fought for the rights
:35:46. > :35:48.of... It was a savage imperial slaughter, which was, in fact,
:35:49. > :35:53.opposed by many people when it began, despite the jingoistic
:35:54. > :35:56.fervour at the time, which quickly dissipated. It was a war to carve up
:35:57. > :35:59.markets and resources and territories by Imperial College
:36:00. > :36:07.around the world. They all shared responsibility for the way that
:36:08. > :36:12.began -- imperial powers. Belgian sovereignty was just one factor in a
:36:13. > :38:30.process of inexorable drive to war, which of course
:38:31. > :38:39.Does this mean women and children, civilians should be shot out of hand
:38:40. > :38:44.by invading German armies? I don't think two wrongs justify a right.
:38:45. > :38:47.But the rights of small nations all over the world were not just
:38:48. > :38:52.violated but were ripped up, and we are living with the consequences
:38:53. > :38:55.today. Sticky yellow well, look, I'm sorry, I don't think this is a
:38:56. > :39:08.football match where somebody scores a goal. We are trying to get at
:39:09. > :39:13.something important here. Just look at the history of the Middle East.
:39:14. > :39:19.It is more complicated... Can I just finished? Can I finish what I'm
:39:20. > :39:22.saying? What I am trying to say is history is not a simple process,
:39:23. > :39:27.that there are many explanations and one of the reasons we're talking so
:39:28. > :39:35.much about the First World War and its origins is because there is so
:39:36. > :39:37.much fear about it. The important thing is the discussion. The
:39:38. > :39:42.problems in the Middle East, in part, date back to the settlements
:39:43. > :39:47.made at the end of the First World War but they also date and due to
:39:48. > :39:50.the fact that the Middle East is a very complicated part of the world
:39:51. > :39:54.with many religions and ethnicities. There is a certain arrogance when we
:39:55. > :39:59.assume the West is responsible for everything going wrong in the world.
:40:00. > :40:05.Let us at least try to understand that people have agency as well. But
:40:06. > :40:09.ask them what they feel about it today and the carving up of their
:40:10. > :40:15.country between imperial powers? It has happened all over the world.
:40:16. > :40:23.Certainty is usually the enemy of truth. Thank you. If your country
:40:24. > :40:28.gets handed to foreign powers it has nothing to do with the rights of
:40:29. > :40:35.small nations. Actually, it was something called self-determination.
:40:36. > :40:40.Not only for Europeans. For India... But what about 20 years later? I do
:40:41. > :40:44.think 20 years later is very long, actually. You get something called
:40:45. > :40:48.self-determination that was not perfect. If we are looking for
:40:49. > :40:52.perfection we are not going to get it. But we were looking through the
:40:53. > :40:59.introduction where European powers had certain responsibilities...
:41:00. > :41:05.Mandates were colonies. Like Syria, like Palestine. It is fascinating
:41:06. > :41:10.listening to both of you, but the point made by Bruce early on about
:41:11. > :41:13.the roots of war, it is coming into my mind, a famous cartoon after the
:41:14. > :41:19.Treaty of Versailles with politicians having signed the
:41:20. > :41:22.treaty, and there is a double boy crying, weeping because of the
:41:23. > :41:26.unresolved issues and the dangerous road ahead, so it is almost as if
:41:27. > :41:31.there was acknowledgement of that, as Bruce was saying, that they were
:41:32. > :41:37.already planting the seeds of the next conflict. You can always go
:41:38. > :41:41.back and see the seeds of conflict. In 1919 they were dealing with a
:41:42. > :41:46.shattered world. I'd expect the circumstances were not very good and
:41:47. > :41:52.you have nationalism running ramp -- rampant. This was not a peaceful
:41:53. > :41:57.world. You had a whole lot of wars breaking out. The First World War
:41:58. > :42:01.did not solve all the problems, it opened the door to other ones. But
:42:02. > :42:09.to say that what happened in 1919, and my view, again, is that it was a
:42:10. > :42:12.dangerous oversimplification. Why was Hitler rising in Germany? What
:42:13. > :42:23.will people doing for 20 years? We'll have to allow agency interest
:42:24. > :42:27.-- in history. There were choices and moments where Europe did not
:42:28. > :42:33.have to go to war and it could have gone in another direction. And the
:42:34. > :42:41.rampant anti-Semitism. Let's hear from some who have their hands up.
:42:42. > :42:44.Good morning. Was listening to the gentleman on the front row who is
:42:45. > :42:52.taking a very strong pacifist position. Andrew, you have everybody
:42:53. > :42:56.talking! I think he is quite controversial and it has caused a
:42:57. > :43:01.lot of debate, what he has said. One of the things he said is as a
:43:02. > :43:05.pacifist you could never justify the targeting of civilians in warfare.
:43:06. > :43:09.Everybody agrees with that, even if you support the notion of warfare.
:43:10. > :43:13.Nobody wants the targeting of civilians. And what you have to take
:43:14. > :43:17.into account is that the military technology we have today allows us
:43:18. > :43:22.to target much more accurately those people who seek to do evil in the
:43:23. > :43:26.world, and I accept there is a degree of some collateral damage, as
:43:27. > :43:31.it is sometimes called, at it is nothing like the bombing of Dresden
:43:32. > :43:35.during the war, where there is wholesale slaughter of people. So,
:43:36. > :43:39.you know, you have to be a bit careful in the words you choose,
:43:40. > :43:45.suggesting people who support the notion of a just war somehow justify
:43:46. > :43:49.the killing of civilians. I am glad you raise the issue of weaponry,
:43:50. > :43:54.because, of course, in the First World War, we saw an extraordinary
:43:55. > :44:04.and frightening exoneration of this sort of technology of war. I mean,
:44:05. > :44:07.you know, the poem of Wilfred Owen. "The white eyes writhing in his
:44:08. > :44:11.face, his hanging face like a devil's sick of sin," the shock of
:44:12. > :44:16.seeing the gas. Did it not move war to a new level where justification
:44:17. > :44:19.and the idea of a just war was far more difficult because of the way it
:44:20. > :44:23.was carried out? Yes, but I come back to my earlier point which is
:44:24. > :44:27.still, I think, important which is the justification hyphen-macro is
:44:28. > :44:32.this the right thing to be doing? And if it is, how do we conduct
:44:33. > :44:36.this? But if they're using gas, you've got to use gas. Not
:44:37. > :44:44.necessarily If they use machine guns... No? Not necessarily. How you
:44:45. > :44:48.use technology, how you use weapon systems is, you know, dependent on
:44:49. > :44:51.what you're trying to achieve. We don't use the same weapon systems
:44:52. > :44:55.today that maybe we would have used then. And, quite rightly, people
:44:56. > :45:00.regale against the use of gas, hence the position in Syria. So technology
:45:01. > :45:03.moves on, counter technology and so on. But you're right, obviously, and
:45:04. > :45:06.I'm supporting the general point that in terms of collateral damage,
:45:07. > :45:09.targeting, the use of weapon systems, we are in a different world
:45:10. > :45:13.today than we were back in 1914, 1918 or indeed 1939. But there were
:45:14. > :45:17.weapon systems being used in the American Civil War that caused an
:45:18. > :45:21.awful lot of people to be killed. I mean the weapon system is not, I
:45:22. > :45:24.don't think, part of this debate in one sense. It's a related issue.
:45:25. > :45:27.It's not the key driver. It's the scale of killing, surely. 800,000
:45:28. > :45:30.people died in Rwanda using machetes, as you made the point
:45:31. > :45:34.earlier. So let's not get confused by that. How many more would have
:45:35. > :45:37.died had they had some of these... It's believed that modern technology
:45:38. > :45:41.enables us to be more accurate. In reality, World War One, about half
:45:42. > :45:47.the deaths were military. World War Two, most of the deaths were
:45:48. > :45:50.civilian. Wars fought in the last 20 years, over 90% were civilian. So
:45:51. > :45:53.far from modern technology making things more accurate, the percentage
:45:54. > :45:55.of deaths that are civilian is going up. You're distinguishing two
:45:56. > :45:58.different things. You're quite right. Warfare in 1914 era, 10%
:45:59. > :46:01.civilian, 90% military died on battlefields that were contained in
:46:02. > :46:04.an area of operations. Modern warfare is not like that. Modern
:46:05. > :46:07.warfare does involve more deaths of civilians. Yes, it does, but that's
:46:08. > :46:10.not because of... ALL TALK AT ONCE.
:46:11. > :46:14.This does bring us to war and also Iraq, of course, because a lot of
:46:15. > :46:19.people died in Iraq, You served there didn't you? Yes. Did you feel
:46:20. > :46:23.that you were fighting in a just war as you served for the British Army?
:46:24. > :46:27.Iraq's a controversial issue now. At the time when I left the military, I
:46:28. > :46:31.questioned it but I know the good things that we did in Iraq. Whether
:46:32. > :46:34.it was a just war, that's a massive umbrella term. That wasn't really
:46:35. > :46:38.what a soldier was thinking when he was on the ground. Am I doing the
:46:39. > :46:41.right thing here? You weren't thinking that? I wasn't thinking
:46:42. > :46:45.that, I was thinking, "I'm very excited, I'm a soldier, I'm trained
:46:46. > :46:48.and I want to go to war." As most soldiers were. But it wasn't... We
:46:49. > :46:51.weren't sat there thinking about the just-war tradition, we weren't
:46:52. > :46:54.reading the Testament while we were out there. Usana, you were fighting
:46:55. > :46:57.for Mujahadjadin for a while in Afghanistan, weren't you? You
:46:58. > :47:01.understood that sense of excitement, and the here and now, don't you?
:47:02. > :47:04.Absolutely. There's a famous line of poetry in Arabic and Hebrew from the
:47:05. > :47:08.Islamic and Jewish tradition which says, "War, it's like a beautiful
:47:09. > :47:11.young woman to a young man. Very seductive until he chases after her,
:47:12. > :47:15.she turns round and she's an old hag." And that's very deep wisdom
:47:16. > :47:18.which says war is attractive, but the reality of it is terrible. I was
:47:19. > :47:22.in Afghanistan again three years ago and I saw the reality of the current
:47:23. > :47:25.conflict from both sides. Both sides, the Taliban and the NATO
:47:26. > :47:29.troops, kill civilians routinely. Roadside bombs or rockets or drone
:47:30. > :47:32.strikes. What you have to understand is the reality of 21st century
:47:33. > :47:36.technology means so many civilians die in a war. We have to concentrate
:47:37. > :47:38.on pre-emptive peace-making and strengthening the international
:47:39. > :47:47.structures to avoid war, because war is so damaging now and so deadly.
:47:48. > :47:50.Stephen. This is why just war theory needs rethinking now in the light of
:47:51. > :47:54.what's happening after the consequences of war, what I was
:47:55. > :47:58.trying to say before. The effect of some of the wars that have been
:47:59. > :48:01.waged in the last 20 years has been that we've actually developed
:48:02. > :48:04.terrorists who actually are so angry about what has been done to their
:48:05. > :48:08.communities, done to their families, in the name of just wars, that in
:48:09. > :48:16.fact they themselves become part of a new problem of war and terror. And
:48:17. > :48:20.one way or another, we have to look at the consequences of what happens
:48:21. > :48:24.after any war that is being waged. And frankly, one of the great
:48:25. > :48:29.mistakes in the Iraq war was that was just not thought through
:48:30. > :48:35.properly by the United States. And also interestingly, Peter... And I
:48:36. > :48:40.know you wrote Blair's Just War. The subtitle is the important bit
:48:41. > :48:45.though. What was the subtitle? "Iraq and the illusion of morality". Oh,
:48:46. > :48:48.right, yes. I was going to put it in that context but the subtitle kind
:48:49. > :48:52.of does it. It's interesting, because Stephen raised it here about
:48:53. > :48:55.what you do in the aftermath, because I think Tony Blair touched
:48:56. > :48:58.on this in his famous hyphen-macro people at the time were saying
:48:59. > :49:01.landmark hyphen-macro speech in Chicago in 1999, when he was talking
:49:02. > :49:05.about the concept of liberal intervention. He was talking about
:49:06. > :49:10.Kosovo in this case, but he said, "When we're talking about
:49:11. > :49:15.intervention..." He listed criteria, three of which were these ones. "We
:49:16. > :49:19.must be sure of our case," he said. "We must be prepared for the long
:49:20. > :49:22.term," and I guess he means a long conflict and also the aftermath. He
:49:23. > :49:26.said, "Do we have national interests involved?" He asked those three
:49:27. > :49:30.questions. Many would argue there are no ticks there at all, in terms
:49:31. > :49:33.of Iraq. With Iraq he violated... His own arguments were very good and
:49:34. > :49:36.actually, they weren't written by him. They were written by Professor
:49:37. > :49:40.Laurence Freedman from King's College London. He read them out,
:49:41. > :49:43.though. He read them out, and interestingly, for your interest,
:49:44. > :49:46.Professor Freedman is sitting on the panel judging the Iraq war, which I
:49:47. > :49:50.find fascinating. A good reflection of British politics. However, Blair
:49:51. > :49:53.did not satisfy his own criteria over Iraq. And this issue of let's
:49:54. > :49:57.intervene on humanitarian terms, on an ethical basis, but have we got
:49:58. > :50:01.national self interest involved? It is a contradiction. Blair was one
:50:02. > :50:03.constant contradiction, and he presented moral argument, or
:50:04. > :50:06.supposedly moral argument after moral argument because he knew he
:50:07. > :50:10.had no solid intelligence, he knew he had no legal basis and he was
:50:11. > :50:16.trying to use highly emotive arguments to gain support from a
:50:17. > :50:19.sceptical country. And he apparently studied Thomas Aquinas in detail and
:50:20. > :50:24.St Augustine, he went through them with a fine-tooth comb. I'm sure he
:50:25. > :50:27.did, and there's no-one that Tony Blair cannot bend to his own
:50:28. > :50:32.advantage when it comes to the use of words. And the use of truth, come
:50:33. > :50:36.to that. Bruce Kent. I just think that we're losing the main issue,
:50:37. > :50:38.which to me is to stop wars in the future, to build the world
:50:39. > :50:43.structures that makes war barbaric. I don't go around armed where I live
:50:44. > :50:46.in Finchley. I come to Manchester, I'm not scared of people in
:50:47. > :50:49.Manchester. We've actually built a world within our domestic society,
:50:50. > :50:52.where non-violent settlement of dispute is normal. We have an
:50:53. > :50:55.International Criminal Court which doesn't actually work. We have a
:50:56. > :50:58.manifest arms trade for which this country is very responsible. We
:50:59. > :51:02.threaten other people with nuclear weapons, we ignore law where we can.
:51:03. > :51:05.And we're not building a world and children in school are not taught
:51:06. > :51:10.global citizenship, they're taught British nationality. And I think
:51:11. > :51:14.we've got a lot of changes to make in our whole system if we're going
:51:15. > :51:19.to get rid of war. Some responses. The guy in the black top, first of
:51:20. > :51:22.all. Hi. I'm an RE teacher and I must say, I do teach global
:51:23. > :51:27.citizenship. That's something that's very important to me. But on this
:51:28. > :51:31.issue, I think what we need to think about is we stress so much the first
:51:32. > :51:34.instance of why we should go to war, the just cause, the suffering, the
:51:35. > :51:38.response to suffering, and whether we've got legitimate authority. I
:51:39. > :51:42.think this debate has shown, and I do agree, that we do need to think
:51:43. > :51:45.more about the consequences. Whether we actually got a chance of success,
:51:46. > :51:48.if we're going to have a peaceful resolution, those are also very,
:51:49. > :51:53.very important principles of a just war. And if we are going to move
:51:54. > :51:56.forward, we do need to build a UN that has actually got a chance of
:51:57. > :52:00.putting that into practice. Which is easier said than done, given all the
:52:01. > :52:02.competing interests and competing principles within that organisation.
:52:03. > :52:06.How would you have Dealt? what would your response have been, if you were
:52:07. > :52:12.the American President, Bruce Kent, to 9/11? To 9/11? What would I have
:52:13. > :52:16.implemented? A criminal prosecution against the people concerned. I
:52:17. > :52:19.would have debated with the authorities in Afghanistan who
:52:20. > :52:23.actually wanted to put Bin Laden on trial in a Muslim country, if I
:52:24. > :52:27.remember. I'd have explored all the non-violent ways. He had no
:52:28. > :52:32.authority to go to war in Afghanistan whatsoever according to
:52:33. > :52:36.the charter. None. Tim? Well, I understand that and I said earlier
:52:37. > :52:40.on, declaring a war on terror is like declaring a war on sin, I don't
:52:41. > :52:44.think it achieves very much. I do think when 2,000 people are killed
:52:45. > :52:47.in a city like New York, there is an inevitable? I mean, I understood
:52:48. > :52:51.that intellectually, but I only understood the emotion of it when I
:52:52. > :52:54.lived in Washington in the run-up to Iraq in 2003 and I ended up by
:52:55. > :52:58.working in Baghdad with the post-war, such as it was, the
:52:59. > :53:01.post-war team. So, again, coming back to this point, I don't like
:53:02. > :53:04.this football match, black and white. I'm not against what Bruce is
:53:05. > :53:08.saying, I absolutely agree. So you're for it? We need institutions,
:53:09. > :53:11.we need to develop the United Nations, we need crisis management.
:53:12. > :53:14.We look at the roots and consequences. Ultimately, I have to
:53:15. > :53:18.say the reality is, nonetheless, I sat and watched the mass graves
:53:19. > :53:22.being dug up in Iraq and those who did not want that war have to say to
:53:23. > :53:25.themselves, "What about those people?" What about the people being
:53:26. > :53:29.killed in? I'm not suggesting that it's either or, I'm simply saying?
:53:30. > :53:34.TALK OVER EACH OTHER. Seamus Milne. At the time the
:53:35. > :53:37.invasion of Iraq took place, Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch
:53:38. > :53:40.estimated that maybe 200 people were dying every year because of
:53:41. > :53:43.political causes or repression. Although many more were dying
:53:44. > :53:47.because of sanctions. As a result, a direct result, of the invasion of
:53:48. > :53:51.Iraq, which was aggression, which had no authority, false pretext and
:53:52. > :53:55.was not a just war in any sense, the current estimates are that 500,000
:53:56. > :53:58.people died. I think there has to be some realism about what's taken
:53:59. > :54:02.place in this war. In Afghanistan, as well. We're talking about tens of
:54:03. > :54:06.thousands of people who've died and none of the objectives have been
:54:07. > :54:10.achieved. The war on terror has spread terror, rather than reducing
:54:11. > :54:19.it, all over the region and beyond, including in this country. A quick
:54:20. > :54:22.response, Usana. I want to speak to Joan about her grandson, Kevin. I
:54:23. > :54:25.want to give a non-Western view. After 9/11, had the Muslim countries
:54:26. > :54:29.been stronger, they could have implemented the Taliban desire to
:54:30. > :54:33.put Bin Laden on trial. Similarly, in the First World War, don't forget
:54:34. > :54:36.this, was seen by the rest of the world as a European civil war
:54:37. > :54:40.between colonial powers. Also the Ottoman Empire, which allied with
:54:41. > :54:43.the Germans who tried to get Muslims to rise up against the British
:54:44. > :54:48.Empire and, of course, thousands of Muslims fought for the British
:54:49. > :54:52.Empire in the First World War. So the rest of the world was caught up
:54:53. > :54:55.in the politics, which most people thought wars are about politics and
:54:56. > :54:57.economics. And the religious justification really comes
:54:58. > :55:00.afterwards for some people. Joan, you lost Kevin, your grandson, and
:55:01. > :55:03.you work very hard with Military Families Against the War, is that
:55:04. > :55:08.the organisation? Yes, and the Stop the War Coalition. What happened to
:55:09. > :55:11.Kevin? He was out on patrol, a company he'd never been out with
:55:12. > :55:15.before someone couldn't go. And apparently was hit by an RPG. He and
:55:16. > :55:19.another guy were killed at the same time. A sergeant. Did he believe
:55:20. > :55:23.what he was doing was the right thing? Did he think that he should
:55:24. > :55:29.have been there? I guess you had conversations. I did. He didn't
:55:30. > :55:33.really think it out. All he would say to me was he served in Iraq and
:55:34. > :55:36.that was much better, the people were better, everything was better
:55:37. > :55:39.in Iraq compared to Afghanistan. The Iraqis didn't hate them quite as
:55:40. > :55:42.much. Whereas every Afghani loathed them. Which I understand, because
:55:43. > :55:47.our soldiers had attacked their country. If someone attacks us,
:55:48. > :55:51.you're going to fight back. I can't agree with that chap saying no
:55:52. > :55:56.violence. You've got to stand up for yourself. And Kevin just did not
:55:57. > :56:00.enjoy? he'd actually left the army, he was walking out the gates, and
:56:01. > :56:04.turned round and went back in again because he reckoned he couldn't
:56:05. > :56:10.leave his friends to face it. Now that is one thing the army does
:56:11. > :56:14.teach, I admire it. The camaraderie. They all look after each other. And
:56:15. > :56:18.if schools and other organisations could get that, it would be
:56:19. > :56:27.wonderful. If you could say anything to Tony Blair what would you say to
:56:28. > :56:30.him? Well, he killed my grandson. He's responsible for his death.
:56:31. > :56:34.There's no doubt about that. You really think that, do you? Oh, yes,
:56:35. > :56:38.and I think Tony Blair and George Bush. Now, I've listened to a lot of
:56:39. > :56:42.religious statements today, I have no religion at all. And I think
:56:43. > :56:45.sometimes Blair and Bush were sort of making their Christian beliefs
:56:46. > :56:51.against people who were not of Christian beliefs, Muslims and other
:56:52. > :56:54.different religions. I think Tony Blair and George Bush, with their
:56:55. > :56:59.extreme Christian beliefs, and they were extreme, they were quite happy
:57:00. > :57:03.to attack Muslims. Let's put that to Tim, because what you said is very,
:57:04. > :57:11.very strong. She believes Tony Blair killed her grandson. Well, I don't.
:57:12. > :57:15.I understand the point about? I've been in the military for 40 years
:57:16. > :57:19.and there's no better community, I can tell you. British soldiers are
:57:20. > :57:23.fantastic. But, I have to be honest and say that I think the idea that
:57:24. > :57:27.Tony Blair sort of rubbed his hands together with glee and goes to war
:57:28. > :57:31.because he thinks it's a great idea, or Bush, or most other ordinary
:57:32. > :57:33.people, I just think is wrong. Leadership is difficult, people make
:57:34. > :57:37.difficult decisions, they make the choices they believe are right. Now
:57:38. > :57:41.I don't believe that what happened in Iraq is necessarily a good thing,
:57:42. > :57:44.I don't want to give that impression at all, but again you've got to put
:57:45. > :57:47.it into context of history hyphen-macro where Blair comes from,
:57:48. > :57:52.what he's seen through Rwanda, which had a searing effect on him, it had
:57:53. > :57:55.a searing effect on Kofi Annan, the whole idea of the responsibility to
:57:56. > :57:59.protect begins to emerge, your point about the Chicago speech? We get to
:58:00. > :58:03.a place, Kosovo works well and I think Iraq, you know, flows from
:58:04. > :58:06.that. And I'm not saying he's right. But the idea that he killed, in that
:58:07. > :58:10.sense, deliberately, I just think it's wrong. He committed an act of
:58:11. > :58:13.unprovoked aggression. For which he has not been held to account. Ladies
:58:14. > :58:16.and gentlemen, there's been some fascinating points made, we have
:58:17. > :58:20.unfortunately come to the end. But thank you all very much indeed.
:58:21. > :58:22.Thank you very much for your participation. As ever the debate
:58:23. > :58:26.will continue on Twitter, online. Join us next Sunday from Bishops
:58:27. > :58:28.Stortford, but for now, it's goodbye from everyone here in Salford.
:58:29. > :58:31.Thanks for watching.