Current paradigm of «ius ad bellum»: «¿quid pro quo?»

Authors

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.14422/pen.v80.i310.y2024.010

Keywords:

peace, International Law, human rights, political philosophy

Abstract

This study aims to address the legal basis of the armed conflict, its global effects and reactions to it from a historical and philosophical basis. From the origin of societies to technological sophistication, war is inherent to Mankind. How States and International Organizations interact in this regard has varied with the evolution of conflicts and societies. It raises whether the restoration or guarantee of a Rule of Law, with special relevance of a Judicial Power as its cornerstone; it continues to be the cause and end of an armed intervention and if the armed conflict is acceptable and justifiable under the protection of an international organization that transcends the States.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Aristóteles. Política.

Base Documental de la ONU: http://www.un.org/es/sections/general/documents/index.html

Cicerón. Catilinarias. 2015.

Cicerón. De Oficiis. Alianza Editorial. 2013.

E. Kant. “Sobre la Paz Perpetua”.

J. Rawls. A Theory of Justice. Oxford University Press. 2005.

Juan XXIII, Encíclica “Pacem in terris”.

Kirk y Raven. "Los filósofos presocráticos", Madrid, Gredos, 1970.

Miguel A. Vergara Villalobos; “Sociedad, paz y guerra en San Agustín”. Revista Política y Estrategia. n˚ 117 – 2011.

Nicolás Maquiavelo. El Príncipe.

Platón. República.

S.I. Kovaliov. Historia de Roma. Akal. 2011.

San Agustín. Contra Faustum.

San Agustín. De verbis Dom.

San Agustín. Quaest. in Exod.

Thomas Hobbes. Leviatán.

Tomás de Aquino. Suma Teológica.

Downloads

Published

2025-01-24

Issue

Section

Estudios, textos, notas y comentarios

How to Cite

Current paradigm of «ius ad bellum»: «¿quid pro quo?». (2025). Pensamiento. Revista De Investigación E Información Filosófica, 80(310), 1009-1024. https://doi.org/10.14422/pen.v80.i310.y2024.010