Hinduism is based on a concept known as dharma. The essence of dharma is the distinction between good, supporting the cosmic order, and evil, which poses a threat to this order. Accordingly, the preservation of good at the cost of a war was justified in ancient Vedic society. However, unlike the Christian concept of 'crusade' or 'bellum justissimum' and its counterpart 'Jihad' in Islam, there is no justification in Hinduism for any war against foreigners or people of other faiths. The concept of dharma in its original sense means the maintenance of peace and security through the law and order within the larger cosmic order. Thus, the concept of just war in Hinduism is against the evil characters of the day, whether national or alien. It is based on right and wrong and on justice and injustice in the everyday life of all mortals, whether Hindus or non-Hindus. Unlawful and unjust actions, e.g. the denial of the rights to which one was entitled, gave rise to just wars. However, when it came to fighting a war certain laws of war had to be observed. A ruler or a king who did not observe the laws of war had no place in the galaxy of virtuous and victorious kings. As are the laws of war in modern international law, the laws of war in Hinduism were designed to make the conduct of war as humane as possible. The Hindu laws of war included rules to ensure that warfare was conducted in a fair manner and by open means. The rules governed issues ranging from general prohibition on the use of weapons that caused unnecessary pain or more suffering than was indispensable to overcoming the enemy to the treatment of enemy property and persons in conquered territory. The essence of the Hindu laws of war was to prohibit inequality in fighting and to protect those who exhibit helplessness. If the modern laws of war were to require that when war breaks out fighting must be conducted on the basis of 'like with like' or by using like weapons, it would not only minimise the impact of war but would also deter aggression and make war more humane. The world would be a better place to live in if the modern laws of war based on the Geneva Conventions were to incorporate some of the rules of Hindu laws of war.
The Journal of Conflict & Security Law (JCSL) is a thrice yearly peer-reviewed journal aimed at academics, government officials, military lawyers, and lawyers working in the area, as well as individuals interested in the areas of arms control law, armed conflict law and collective security law, and the interfaces between JCSL covers the whole spectrum of international law relating to armed conflict from the pre-conflict stage when the issues include those of arms control, disarmament and conflict prevention, through to the outbreak of armed conflict and discussions on the legality of resort to force (jus ad bellum), to the coverage of the conduct of military operations and the protection of non-combatants by international humanitarian law (jus in bello). The international legal framework applicable to terrorism spans both the jus ad bellum and jus in bello. Treatment is also given to the conflict resolution stage, where the legal issues concern peace agreements, post-conflict rebuilding (jus post-bellum), territory, compensation and disarmament. Collective security mechanisms such as peacekeeping and military enforcement action are potentially applicable throughout.
Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University's objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide. OUP is the world's largest university press with the widest global presence. It currently publishes more than 6,000 new publications a year, has offices in around fifty countries, and employs more than 5,500 people worldwide. It has become familiar to millions through a diverse publishing program that includes scholarly works in all academic disciplines, bibles, music, school and college textbooks, business books, dictionaries and reference books, and academic journals.
This item is part of JSTOR collection
For terms and use, please refer to our Terms and Conditions
Journal of Conflict & Security Law
© 2003 Oxford University Press
Request Permissions