Is self Defence a just war?

The concept of a "just war" traditionally refers to the ethical criteria that may justify the use of military force in certain circumstances. It is a complex and debated topic within ethical, moral, and international relations frameworks. Self-defense is generally considered a just cause for war under the just war theory.

According to the traditional principles of just war, a conflict can be considered just if it meets certain criteria, including:

1. Just Cause: The reason for going to war needs to be just and cannot therefore, therefore, can only be waged defensively in response to aggression or to redress a wrong suffered.

2. Legitimate Authority: Only duly constituted public authorities may wage war.

3. Right Intention: A just war must be fought for the right reasons and with the right intention. It should aim to establish a just peace.

4. Probability of Success: Arms may not be used in a futile cause or in a case where disproportionate measures are required to achieve success.

5. Last Resort: Force may be used only after all peaceful alternatives have been seriously tried and exhausted.

6. Proportionality: The violence used in the war must be proportional to the injury suffered. The use of force must be limited by what is necessary to achieve a just and lasting peace.

In the context of self-defense, a just war may be considered when a nation is under direct threat or attack, and all other means of resolving the conflict have been exhausted or are not practical. The right to self-defense is widely recognized in international law.

It's important to note that interpretations of these principles can vary, and opinions on what constitutes a just war may differ based on individual perspectives, cultural contexts, and geopolitical considerations. Additionally, with the evolution of international law and changing norms, discussions around just war theory continue to evolve.