The Moral Dilemmas of Fighting Terrorism and Guerrilla Groups discusses the most important ethical dilemmas associated with the fight against terrorist organizations and guerilla groups by providing readers with a rigorous, yet accessible analysis of how these forms of violence can be justified and how they ought to be fought by entities targeted by groups resorting to these strategies. It will be valuable to anyone interested in understanding the main ethical questions associated with these forms of political violence and the way they can be addressed. After providing conceptual clarifications that will allow the reader to distinguish between terrorism and guerrilla warfare, it explains and discusses what the criteria are that can justify resorting to lethal violence on the part of the latter group as well as the criteria that can determine the identity of those who can legitimately be targeted by these groups. The book analyzes when terrorists ought to be targeted and how this can be done, focusing on the inherent problems associated with the solutions that are normally used against state actors in order to prevent attacks on their part, namely what can be coined as “non-violent alternatives to war”, such as economic or diplomatic sanctions, arm embargoes and non-violent resistance and, on the other hand, preemptive attacks.

The Ethics of Insurgency explains how guerrillas who pursue national self-determination may justly utilize many unlawful practices of war.

A practical guide for policy makers, military officers, students, and anyone else interested in asymmetric conflicts.

The first documented, systematic study of a truly revolutionary subject, this 1937 text remains the definitive guide to guerrilla warfare. It concisely explains unorthodox strategies that transform disadvantages into benefits.

Looking back at the "War on Terror" and its policies, actions, and the violence that followed, this book analyzes the resulting changes in international power structures and the relationship between citizens and their representatives. It defines our shortcomings in opposing this type of violence by demonstrating how the notion of legitimate violence has been broadened. The impact of the "War on Terror" on the public view of Liberalism is explored, as well as its effects on the role of state authorities in our lives. Thus, this book names the lessons we ought to learn from the actions taken against terrorist organizations.

A comprehensive exploration of contemporary debates in Just War Theory, addressing moral, political, and legal issues.

A systematic account of the right to resist oppression and of the forms of armed force it can justify.

This book explores the forms of fear that are becoming more visible in liberal democracies and how they now tend to condition our existences in a way that is detrimental to our personal freedom. The author explores how the conception of human existence that now dominates in liberal societies and that places the highest value on the preservation of life at all cost plays a significant role in this regard. He explores the origins of this form of biopolitics that has emerged after the end of the Cold War and shows how it has dramatically changed our relationship with the state and also explains how this new dynamic has been favorable to the imposition of disproportional restrictions on our individual freedom. The Covid-19 pandemic has indeed shown that when the fear of dying ends up taking precedence over any other considerations, individuals and societies are led on an illiberal path that can only contribute to the gradual erosion of their liberties and on the development and acceptance of a new type of governance that justifies the imposition of liberticidal measures. This book will appeal to scholars and students of political theory and comparative democracy, civil rights advocates and media professionals interested in questions related to liberalism and its post-Cold War evolution.

Most people strongly condemn terrorism; yet they often fail to say how terrorist acts differ from other acts of violence such as the killing of civilians in war. Stephen Nathanson argues that we cannot have morally credible views about terrorism if we focus on terrorism alone and neglect broader issues about the ethics of war. His book challenges influential views on the ethics of war, including the realist view that morality does not apply to war, and Michael Walzer's defence of attacks on civilians in 'supreme emergency' circumstances. It provides a clear definition of terrorism, an analysis of what makes terrorism morally wrong, and a rule-utilitarian defence of noncombatant immunity, as well as discussions of the Allied bombings of cities in World War II, collateral damage, and the clash between rights theories and utilitarianism. It will interest a wide range of readers in philosophy, political theory, international relations and law.