War, Peace and Justice LIBS 7011

Upon successful completion of this course, the student will be able to:

• Apply cross-disciplinary methods and concepts in course assignments and discussions.
• Critically read and assess material from disciplines, genres, and eras other than those normally encountered in his/her BCIT technology program.
• Compare traditional and contemporary approaches to past and current controversies presented in the course.
• Produce paragraph-based, essay-based and/or oral presentations that evaluate aspects of the course material.
• Produce written and oral arguments that demonstrate skills in critical thinking, reading, and writing.
• Apply course concepts and skills to his/her intellectual, civic and professional life outside the classroom.
• Explain the principled differences between pacifism, realism and just war theory.
• Assess the merit of the realist critique of pacifism.
• Assess the merit of the realist critique of just war theory.
• Judge the effectiveness of the replies to the realist challenge.
• Assess the pacifist critique of just war theory.
• Judge the effectiveness of the replies to the pacifist critique of just war theory.
• Explain the nature of just cause, with respect to jus ad bellum.
• Judge the proper scope of concepts such as right intention, proper authority, last resort and proportionality, with respect to jus ad bellum.
• Explain the nature of jus in bello, in both its internal and external forms.
• Explain the principle of non-combatant immunity.
• Explain the proportionality rule, with respect to jus in bello.
• Interpret and apply rules of jus in bello to cases of historical significance.
• Explain the nature of jus post bellum, with reference to peace settlements, rights restoration, rehabilitation, restitution and punishment for war crimes.
• Apply the rules of jus post bellum to the current occupation of Iraq.
• Assess the status of the International Court of Justice at the Hague, in terms of legitimacy and efficacy.
• Establish the priority among principles and laws when these are seen to conflict in particular cases.
• Employ three modes of judicial reasoning: reasoning from interpretive guidelines, reasoning from prior cases, reasoning from principle.

Effective as of Fall 2009