Advertisement

Supported by

David French

By David French

Opinion Columnist

President Trump has done it again.

He is attacking a genuine and serious problem recklessly, heedless of the consequences and, in this case, of human life.

On Tuesday I watched Trump proudly display grainy footage of a military strike on what he said was a boat full of narco-terrorists on their way to the United States with a load of drugs.

Typically, when the Coast Guard or another branch of the military or law enforcement spots a boat suspected of carrying drugs, we seek to stop the boat, search it, seize any drugs and arrest and question the crew. If these drug smuggling suspects open fire, American forces can respond, but they cannot simply execute someone on the mere suspicion of drug trafficking.

We do not kill those suspected of being criminals from the air.

The thing that separates war from murder is the law, and the law of war contains two key components. They go by two Latin terms: jus ad bellum and jus in bello.

Jus ad bellum refers to the limited legal right to go to war. In other words, when is it legal to fight?

Jus in bello refers to conduct within the war. If it’s lawful to fight, then how must I fight?

For the use of military force to be lawful, it must satisfy the requirements of both doctrines. There must be a legal basis for the use of force, and the force that is used must also be lawful. Russia’s war in Ukraine would be lawless, for example, even if President Vladimir Putin confined himself to conducting airstrikes against only military targets, and even if his troops behaved scrupulously in the field.

Why? Because there was no justification for the initial invasion. International law prohibits wars of aggression and territorial conquest, so Russia’s war itself is a crime, regardless of how the military behaves.

Conversely, when debating Israel’s war in Gaza, jus ad bellum is satisfied: Hamas’s attacks on Oct. 7, 2023, gave Israel the legal right to respond with military force, even to the point of removing Hamas from power. The controversies are, for the most part, over jus in bello, Israel’s conduct in the war. Hamas’s attack did not give Israel carte blanche to fight however it desires.

In the United States, we have two firewalls against unjust and unlawful wars. First, the Constitution grants Congress the exclusive power to declare war. The president does have authority as commander in chief to respond to immediate military threats, like an armed attack, before a declaration of war, but he is not supposed to initiate new hostilities in the absence of congressional action.

A crime — even a crime as vicious as trafficking hard drugs into the United States — is........

© The New York Times