The Role of Just War Theory in the Justification of U.S. Military Force in the Twenty-First Century

Abstract

The article examines how Just War Theory (JWT) functions in the twenty-first century not merely as a normative philosophical tradition, but as an empirically observable framework of justification in the public legitimation of United States military force. It argues that, alongside the decline of formally declared wars, contemporary U.S. military operations are increasingly marked by contested legal status and ambiguous political objectives. Consequently, the normative credibility of military interventions – articulated through concepts such as self-defense, prevention, civilian protection, and the maintenance of international order – has become a central condition of political sustainability and coalition acceptance. Methodologically, the study employs a qualitative, interpretive normative-political discourse analysis, drawing on primary sources (presidential speeches, national security strategies, official government statements, and coalition-related documents). The theoretical framework provides a concise overview of the historical foundations of Just War Theory and its American “rediscovery,” followed by an outline of the contemporary debate between “traditional” (Walzerian–Rawlsian) and revisionist approaches. This debate is interpreted through a functional perspective, emphasizing the practical role of normative frameworks in legitimating military action rather than their philosophical validity. The analysis demonstrates that U.S. justificatory narratives predominantly rely on a framework centered on collective rights and the preservation of international order, while revisionist approaches grounded in individual moral responsibility remain marginal in practical application. The examination of the Trump era serves as a complementary counter-case, showing that the partial retreat from norm-based justification and the growing prominence of transactional reasoning generated tensions within alliance structures and international legitimacy. These findings underscore the structural importance of Just War discourse as a hegemonic justificatory framework in contemporary U.S. military practice.