Were the Crusades a just war?

Answer 1

I would argue that they were not. In order for a war to be considered just within the Christian Just war theory it has to meet criteria. The first criteria establishes whether there is a jus ad bellum, that is, is there a right to go to war?; the second establishes the jus in bello, How we define Just conduct by OUR troops within the war?

Jus ad bellumThe reason for going to war needs to be just and cannot therefore be solely for recapturing things taken or punishing people who have done wrong; innocent life must be in imminent danger and intervention must be to protect life. So the Crusades, which were often about recapturing the 'Holy Places' in Israel fail on the first sub-clause. Comparative justice While there may be rights and wrongs on all sides of a conflict, to override the presumption against the use of force, the injustice suffered by one party must significantly outweigh that suffered by the other. Legitimate authority Only duly constituted public authorities may wage war. Here too, at least some of the Crusades fail. While some of them were blessed by the Popes, others were not (notably the 6th Crusade.) Right intentionForce may be used only in a truly just cause and solely for that purpose—correcting a suffered wrong is considered a right intention, while material gain or maintaining economies is not. Probability of success Arms may not be used in a futile cause or in a case where disproportionate measures are required to achieve success; Last resort Force may be used only after all peaceful and viable alternatives have been seriously tried and exhausted or are clearly not practical. It may be clear that the other side is using negotiations as a delaying tactic and will not make meaningful concessions. Proportionality The anticipated benefits of waging a war must be proportionate to its expected evils or harms. This principle is also known as the principle of macro-proportionality, so as to distinguish it from the jus in bello principle of proportionality. Jus in belloOnce war has begun, just war theory also directs how combatants are to act: Distinction Just war conduct should be governed by the principle of distinction. The acts of war should be directed towards enemy combatants, and not towards non-combatants caught in circumstances they did not create. The prohibited acts include bombing civilian residential areas that include no military target and committing acts of terrorism or reprisal against ordinary civilians. Proportionality Just war conduct should be governed by the principle of proportionality. An attack cannot be launched on a military objective in the knowledge that the incidental civilian injuries would be clearly excessive in relation to the anticipated military advantage (principle of proportionality). Military necessity Just war conduct should be governed by the principle of minimum force. An attack or action must be intended to help in the military defeat of the enemy, it must be an attack on a military objective, and the harm caused to civilians or civilian property must be proportional and not excessive in relation to the concrete and direct military advantage anticipated. This principle is meant to limit excessive and unnecessary death and destruction.