As teorias das guerras preventivas e as internacionais
Carregando...
Data
2009-06-15
Autores
Palácios Júnior, Alberto Montoya Correa [UNESP]
Título da Revista
ISSN da Revista
Título de Volume
Editor
Universidade Estadual Paulista (Unesp)
Resumo
A incorporação do conceito da estratégia preemptiva ao documento de Estratégia de Segurança Nacional dos EUA em 2002, e a suposta aplicação dessa estratégia na Guerra do Iraque em 2003, fez com que os debates teóricos sobre guerras preventivas e preemptivas fossem reabertos. Em termos gerais, as guerras preventivas podem ser entendidas como o “início de uma ação militar em antecipação a ações danosas que não ocorrem no presente nem são iminentes”. A análise da definição de guerras preventivas mereceu enfoque especial para embasar o estudo das três correntes teóricas principais sobre o tema nas Relações Internacionais, quais sejam: a proibição geral das guerras justas (bellum justum); o status quo legal (direito internacional) e o realismo político. Esta proposta de sistematização do debate nos parece a mais apropriada, por abranger as principais linhas argumentativas teóricas sobre o tema objeto da pesquisa. As abordagens sobre a proibição geral das guerras justas; sobre o status quo legal e realismo político, equivalem às denominadas abordagens moralistas, legalistas e realistas, respectivamente. Cada uma dessas três correntes prioriza uma dimensão de análise dentro da qual se levanta uma problemática sobre as guerras preventivas. De igual forma, constituem foco desta pesquisa as questões levantadas; para os adeptos do bellum justum a questão se coloca nos seguintes termos: as guerras preventivas são justas, isto é, são legítimas? Para os adeptos do status quo legal será: as guerras preventivas podem ser legais? E as levantadas pelos adeptos do realismo: as guerras preventivas são úteis? Com essas questões em mente apresentaremos os argumentos que cada corrente seleciona para respondê-las, esperando que joguem luz sobre as guerras preventivas.
This research, on the theme of theories of preventive wars in international relations, focuses on the questions described next. For the followers of bellum justum: are preventive wars just, that is, legitimate? For the followers of the legal status quo: can preventive wars be legal? For the followers of political realism: are preventive wars utile? With these inquiries as its center, it aims to present the arguments that each of these lines of thought select to answer them. The incorporation of the concept of preemptive strategy in the USA`s National Security Strategy document, in 2002, and the presumed application of this strategy in the Iraq War in 2003 caused the reopening of the debates about preventive and preemptive wars. In general terms, preventive wars can be understood as “the start of a military action in anticipation to harmful actions that do not occur in the present and are not imminent”. Here, the definition’s analyses of preventive wars received special attention, in order to create the foundation for the study of the three main lines of thought in the theme of International Relations: the blanket prohibition of just wars (bellum justum), the status quo (international law) and political realism. This debate`s systematization proposal seems more appropriate because it embraces the main theoretical argumentative lines regarding the research’s subject. The approaches referring to the just wars` general prohibition, the legal status quo and political realism are equivalent to what is called respectively moralist, legalist and realist approaches. Each one of these three lines of thought give priority to a determined analysis` scope, in which a determined problem about preventive wars is raised. The likely outcome of this specific research is to help clarify specific topics regarding preventive wars.
This research, on the theme of theories of preventive wars in international relations, focuses on the questions described next. For the followers of bellum justum: are preventive wars just, that is, legitimate? For the followers of the legal status quo: can preventive wars be legal? For the followers of political realism: are preventive wars utile? With these inquiries as its center, it aims to present the arguments that each of these lines of thought select to answer them. The incorporation of the concept of preemptive strategy in the USA`s National Security Strategy document, in 2002, and the presumed application of this strategy in the Iraq War in 2003 caused the reopening of the debates about preventive and preemptive wars. In general terms, preventive wars can be understood as “the start of a military action in anticipation to harmful actions that do not occur in the present and are not imminent”. Here, the definition’s analyses of preventive wars received special attention, in order to create the foundation for the study of the three main lines of thought in the theme of International Relations: the blanket prohibition of just wars (bellum justum), the status quo (international law) and political realism. This debate`s systematization proposal seems more appropriate because it embraces the main theoretical argumentative lines regarding the research’s subject. The approaches referring to the just wars` general prohibition, the legal status quo and political realism are equivalent to what is called respectively moralist, legalist and realist approaches. Each one of these three lines of thought give priority to a determined analysis` scope, in which a determined problem about preventive wars is raised. The likely outcome of this specific research is to help clarify specific topics regarding preventive wars.
Descrição
Palavras-chave
Relações internacionais, Guerras preventivas, Guerras justas, Preventive war, Preemptive war, Theory of international relations, Bellum justum, Politic realism
Como citar
PALÁCIOS JÚNIOR, Alberto Montoya Correa. As teorias das guerras preventivas e as internacionais. 2009. 151 f. Dissertação (mestrado) -UNESP/UNICAMP/PUC-SP, Programa San Tiago Dantas, 2009.