Does the moral authority to wage a just war rest with the United Nations?
The UN Charter recognises a right to national self-defence, which implies that defence against aggression does not require authorisation by the Security Council; it is an inalienable right of nations. If military force can help advance world order, it certainly helps at the prudential political level if force is approved by the Security Council. A correct reading of the just war tradition does not necessarily suggest that prior Security Council approval is a moral imperative, however. But would an assault to disarm Iraq of weapons of mass destruction, without prior Security Council approval, mean that the “law of the strongest” was replacing international law? No. It would mean that the United States, Britain and other allied countries, having made clear that they intend their action to advance the world order to which the UN is dedicated, have decided that they have a moral obligation to take measures that the UN, as presently configured, finds it impossible to take – even though thes
