What limits does the law set on conduct in war?

Translation: quotations from Hugo Grotius are quoted in Ralph van Deman Magoffin's 1916 English translation; quoted in A. C. Campbell's 1814 English translation (abridged; 1901 edition), not his original words.

1. WHAT HE SAID (the record)

Record ledger

• BELIEF (undated; quoted in Ralph van Deman Magoffin's 1916 English translation): Hugo Grotius believed that the law denies prescription in matters of right between kings or independent nations, regardless of the passage of time. He argued that no amount of time can establish a right in such cases, as there is no sovereign authority over the whole human race to grant such rights. "Therefore the opinion of the jurists is that not even an infinite lapse of time is able to set up a right as between kings or independent nations." [1]
• BELIEF (undated; quoted in A. C. Campbell's 1814 English translation (abridged; 1901 edition)): Hugo Grotius discusses limits on conduct in war, emphasizing that even in war, certain actions are unjust and should be avoided. He argues that war should not be waged for unjust causes and that precautions should be taken to avoid rashly engaging in war, even on just grounds. [2]
• BELIEF (undated; quoted in A. C. Campbell's 1814 English translation (abridged; 1901 edition)): Hugo Grotius believed that conduct in war must be limited by laws that spring from the nature of man and are perpetual, not by civil laws which govern in times of peace. He argued that war should only be undertaken to assert rights and carried on within the limits of rights. (key quote above) [3]
• BELIEF (undated; quoted in A. C. Campbell's 1814 English translation (abridged; 1901 edition)): Hugo Grotius believes that war is accompanied by certain rights or consequences that do not necessarily belong to war itself, and that these are established when war is formally proclaimed between two states or sovereigns. "we learn that whenever war is proclaimed between two states or sovereigns, it is accompanied with certain rights or consequences, which do not necessarily belong to war itself." [4]
• BELIEF (undated; quoted in A. C. Campbell's 1814 English translation (abridged; 1901 edition)): Hugo Grotius believed that in war, only those impressions of fear approved by the law of nations are lawful. He argued that promises extorted under fear, such as by seizing an ambassador, cannot be lawfully enforced. This shows that the law limits conduct in war by prohibiting coercion that undermines the validity of agreements. "The only impressions of fear, that can be lawfully inspired in regular war, are those which are approved of by the law of nations. Thus no one can avail himself of a promise, extorted from an ambassador under impressions of fear excited by the seizing of his person." [5]
• BELIEF (undated; quoted in A. C. Campbell's 1814 English translation (abridged; 1901 edition)): Hugo Grotius believed that the law of nations imposes limits on conduct in war, particularly through the principles of moderation, humanity, and good faith. He argued that acts such as killing enemies, despoiling an enemy's country, making captures, and acquiring dominion must be tempered with these principles. (key quote above) [6]
• BELIEF (undated; quoted in A. C. Campbell's 1814 English translation (abridged; 1901 edition)): Hugo Grotius believed that war for the defense of life is justifiable and lawful, but only against an aggressor. He also held that the danger must be present and real, not imaginary, and that it is lawful to kill someone attempting to maim or violate one's person. Additionally, he argued that homicide in defense of property is allowed by the law of nature, but this right may be lawfully waived, especially with respect to the person of the Sovereign, which is sacred and inviolable. He also stated that it is not lawful to attack any power solely on account of its increasing greatness. "This kind of war lawful against an aggressor only— The danger must be present and real, not an imaginary danger— Lawful to kill any one attempting to maim one's person, or violate one's chastity—... homicide in defence of one's property allowed by the law of nature—... Not lawful to attack any power solely on account of its increasing greatness." [7]
• BELIEF (undated; quoted in A. C. Campbell's 1814 English translation (abridged; 1901 edition)): Hugo Grotius believed that not all wars are condemned by the law of nature or the voluntary law of nations. He argued that certain wars, when made upon just grounds, though not exactly conformable to the law, are not repugnant to it. He also believed that the law of nations allows for the repelling of violence and injury to protect one's person. "From the law of nature then which may also be called the law of nations, it is evident that all kinds of war are not to be condemned... the law of nations allows us to repel violence and injury, in order to protect our persons." [8]
• BELIEF (undated; quoted in A. C. Campbell's 1814 English translation (abridged; 1901 edition)): Hugo Grotius believed that wars declared and conducted by sovereign authority are the only ones considered just wars, and that enemies in such wars have no right to demand restitution for what they abandoned out of fear. He also distinguished between enemies in just wars and robbers or pirates, stating that captures in just wars are lawful, unlike those given up to pirates. (key quote above) [9]

What cuts against it

• ACTION (undated; quoted in A. C. Campbell's 1814 English translation (abridged; 1901 edition)): Hugo Grotius argued that the law of nations does not require a definite time between the declaration of war and the commencement of hostilities, implying that there may be circumstances where immediate action is justified without delay. [10]

• BELIEF (undated; quoted in A. C. Campbell's 1814 English translation (abridged; 1901 edition)): Hugo Grotius believed that in war, conduct is lawful if it is necessary to attain a right, such as self-defense or the enforcement of just punishment. This suggests that the law may allow for a broader range of conduct in war if it is deemed necessary to achieve a just end. [11]

2. HOW IT APPLIES (reasoning; inference is marked)

1. Hugo Grotius believed that the law of nature and the law of nations impose limits on conduct in war, particularly through principles of moderation, humanity, and good faith. [6]

2. He argued that war should only be undertaken to assert rights and carried on within the limits of rights, emphasizing that laws derived from the nature of man remain in effect even during war. [3]

3. Hugo Grotius believed that certain actions, such as killing enemies, despoiling an enemy's country, and acquiring dominion, must be tempered with moderation and humanity, showing that the law does not permit unlimited violence. [6]

4. He also held that the law of nations allows for the repelling of violence and injury to protect one's person, but does not justify attacking a power solely because of its increasing greatness. [7]

5. Hugo Grotius argued that wars declared and conducted by sovereign authority are the only ones considered just wars, and that enemies in such wars have no right to demand restitution for what they abandoned out of fear. [9]

3. HIS TAKE

Record coverage: PARTIAL

The record is silent on the specific modern applications of the law of nations in contemporary warfare, particularly in the context of modern international law and the development of human rights. However, Hugo Grotius's principles suggest that the law of nations continues to impose limits on conduct in war, particularly through the principles of sovereignty, just cause, and proportionality.

Extrapolation: Hugo Grotius would likely argue that the law of nations continues to impose limits on conduct in war, particularly through the principles of sovereignty, just cause, and proportionality. He would emphasize that wars should be declared by sovereign authority, carried out with moderation and humanity, and justified by a legitimate cause such as self-defense or the enforcement of justice.

Competing readings: One reading is that Hugo Grotius believed that the law of nations imposes strict limits on conduct in war, particularly through the principles of sovereignty, just cause, and proportionality. Another reading is that he allowed for some flexibility in conduct during war, particularly in cases of self-defense or the enforcement of just punishment. The record itself supports both readings, as he argued for both strict limits and some flexibility in certain circumstances.

Confidence: Moderate

The confidence in this extrapolation is moderate, as the record provides some direct evidence of Hugo Grotius's beliefs about the limits of conduct in war, but is silent on specific modern applications. The sources are from old editions and may not fully reflect the nuances of modern international law.