ARTICLE: THE CONVERGENCE OF TRADITIONAL THEORY AND MODERN REALITY - JUST WAR DOCTRINE AND TYRANNICAL REGIMES - Spring 2004

Oct 22, 2026

The article argues that democide—intentional government killing of its own people—has consumed far more lives than twentieth-century international wars and undermines any peace concept grounded solely in external hostilities. It proposes a critical review of the current international legal system alongside a refined application of traditional just war doctrine to a new setting: regime change in the context of just war. The study surveys just war theory and uses empirical findings to identify specific regime types tied to democide, terrorism support, and weak safeguards against weapons of mass destruction.

LanguageEnglish

CategoryResearch & Report

FormatPDF

Pages20

Reading Time50 min

AccessFree to download

Introduction

International law, morality, and peace

Just war theory overview

Part I: International law and the goal of peace

Part II: Principles of just war theory (jus ad bellum and jus in bello)

Part III: Attributes of democratic regimes and demarcating tyrannical regimes

Part IV: Limits on moral equivalency in international relations

Part V: Analysis of Bishop Wilton Gregory’s letter on the Iraq war

ARTICLE:THE CONVERGENCE OF TRADITIONAL THEORY AND MODERN REALITY: JUST WAR DOCTRINE AND TYRANNICAL REGIMES Spring, 2004 Reporter 2 Ave Maria L. Rev. 93 * Length: 24487 words Author: Thomas C. Wingfield+ + Mr. Wingfield is the Director for Tyranny, Democracy, and Regime Change at the Potomac Institute for Policy Studies in Arlington, Virginia. He holds a J. D. and an L. L. M. from the Georgetown University Law Center, and is an S.J. D. candidate at the Law School of the University of Virginia. He is a Lecturer in Law at the Columbus School of Law at the Catholic University of America, and may be reached at [twingfield@potomacinstitute.org](twingfield@potomacinstitute.org). Highlight He, then, who prefers what is right to what is wrong, and what is well-ordered to what is perverted, sees that the peace of unjust men is not worthy to be called peace in comparison with the peace of the just To be innocent, we must not only do harm to no man, but also restrain him from sin or punish his sin, so that either the man himself who is punished may profit by his experience, or others be warned by his example. 1 -St. Augustine We will not find peace at home by closing our ears when someone is attacked and crying at our doorstep. Our children will have no peace if no one stops the neighborhood bully. We make peace happen when we remove the threat to peace. 2 -Archbishop Ryan Text [*93] Introduction There is a lesson to be learned at Dachau, Auschwitz, and Buchenwald. It rests in the cold graves of Siberia and muddy pits [*94] filled to the brim with Chinese citizens. It is buried beneath the killing fields of Cambodia. Democide, the intentional killing by a government of its own people within its own borders, has consumed millions of innocent human lives. In fact, it has taken more than all the international wars of the twentieth century. The rise of 1 Saint Augustine, The City of God, Book XIX, ch. 12, 16 (Marcus Dods trans. , Modern Library ed. , Random House 1993) . 2 Michael N. Schmitt, The Confluence of Law and Morality: Thoughts on Just War, 3 U.S. A. F. Acad. J. Legal Stud. 91, 103 (1992) (quoting Archbishop J. Ryan, Pastoral Letter in Time of War (1991)) . Page 2 of 20 2 Ave Maria L. Rev. 93, *94 the modern tyranny and its proclivity to kill its own citizens has shown that the view of peace defined solely in light of external hostilities can no longer satisfy the demands of justice and human rights. This changed understanding of what constitutes true peace requires a critical review of the current international legal system and the traditional just war doctrine underlying it. Yet, far from calling for the abandonment of traditional notions of just war, the solution to democide demands a refined application of this venerable doctrine to meet a heretofore unconsidered circumstance: regime change in the context of just war. This article will review just war theory and then address new empirical findings which clearly demonstrate that regimes of a certain type are responsible not only for almost all of the aggressive international wars launched in the last century, but are guilty of a much larger, and more deadly phenomenon - democide -which has claimed four times more victims than war. The threat posed by democide and the clearly identifiable regime types which perpetrate it, call for an application of just war theory to the only problem more deadly than war. That these same types of regimes are the state supporters of terrorism, and have the weakest institutional safeguards against the use of weapons of mass destruction, makes this application all the more urgent. Part I of this article examines the relationship between international law and just war in respect to the goal of peace. Key to this discussion is an understanding of "true peace." This is not the mere cessation of external hostilities, but a tranquilitatis ordinis of justice and freedom. Part II lays out and individually examines

FAQs

What does the article identify as democide, and why is it central to its argument?

Democide is defined as intentional killing by a government of its own people within its borders. The article treats it as a larger and more deadly phenomenon than war, driving the need to rethink how “true peace” and justice are understood.

How does the article connect just war doctrine to regime change?

It argues that, instead of abandoning traditional just war notions, the doctrine must be refined to address regime change as an unconsidered circumstance within just war.

What are the main components of the just war framework discussed?

The article outlines jus ad bellum requirements such as just cause, legitimate authority, right intention, and prudential tests including expectations of good over evil and reasonable hopes of success.

Oct 22, 2026

Upload by LangkahRina