Move Fast and Break Things: Just War Theory

Things go by so fast in the Trump TV series that we have no time to reflect on what’s happening. That’s the strategy, following the tech world’s motto: move fast and break things.

Donald J. Trump is the star and producer of his own reality TV series THE US GOVERNMENT. Each day brings a brand-new episode. The only real connection between each episode is the star, Trump, who is performing the role of president of the United States, head of all three branches of government. For Trump this is not a metaphor. It’s reality.

The average American spends six hours and forty minutes every day watching a screen, through which we have been trained to interface with reality. It’s only real if it’s on a screen. Want to recall your vacation? Review the selfies: your own TV show starring you! Trump has escalated this to the national level, and he is THE TV star on screen all the time, around the clock, like no other human being, certainly no other American president.

This reality show is designed for speed and virtual reality to overwhelm the slow processes of reflective thought, the printing press. Stop and think and it becomes a fantasy, only a TV show. Marshall McLulan, one of the early theorists of the digital age we are living through, described it as “secondary orality.” In that sense, Trump is an oral person, but he is not a throwback to a past age but our future. He lives and exists in the TV-digital present. He has no past and no future. His is the eternal now of virtual reality. We better figure this out, because he is not an aberration but our future. Trump appears perfectly attuned to the requirements of the digital age.

The speed, virtual reality, and episodic nature of the Trump TV show plays against ethical reflection. America’s bombing of Iran went by so fast that most people never began to consider whether it was morally justified. It was over and done with and Trump and the nation were on to the next episode of the Trump TV Show, The Big Beautiful Bill, coming to every screen.

The US bombing of Iran’s nuclear production facilities raises important ethical questions. Just war theory has a long history in Christian ethics. Without some such theory, a war’s morality is settled only by might makes right.

Just war theory has five basic principles:

• The war must be for a just cause.
• The war must be lawfully declared by a lawful authority.
• The intention behind the war must be good.
• All other ways of resolving the problem should have been tried first.
• There must be a reasonable chance of success.

Before reading on, I ask the reader to review the US bombing of Iran’s atomic facilities in light of these principles.

[Pause and reflect, please!]

On reflection, I think Trump’s action, and it was his action, not the act of the nation—no declaration of war was presented to Congress—violates all five of these principles.

Is preventing Iran from attaining nuclear weapons a just cause? It’s certainly American policy and Iran has been a bad actor in the Middle East. But who gets to decide who should have nuclear weapons? The nations who have them? Trump’s action is especially problematic since in 2018 he withdrew the United States from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, a 2015 agreement between Iran and China, France, Germany, Russia, the United Kingdom, and the United States to limit Iran’s nuclear program. One could argue that his previous action precipitated the present predicament.

According to just war theory, a nation can attack, without having been previously attacked, if the aggressor is preparing for an imminent attack. No evidence points to Iran preparing or even being capable of attack. If there is such evidence, it has not been made public. According to Trump, he was in negotiations with Iran.

In describing the bombing attack, White House and Israeli officials have carefully used the adjective “preemptive,” a technical term from just war theory, but without providing any evidence justifying the attack as preemptive. Rather, the Trump attack was preventive, an attack launched to prevent an enemy from attacking in some unspecified future. Preventive attacks are contrary to just war theory. On the face of it, it would appear that both the Israeli and US bombing strikes were preventive, not preemptive.

Christian theologians and philosophers pieced together just war theory over many centuries to reconcile three conflicting moral principles. Heading the list is the command against taking human life. But then, a state has a duty to defend its citizens against aggressors. And finally, in a war innocent human life must be protected. Just war theory tries to justify the need to defend important ethical values with force and violence. Ethics is the science of reconciling conflicting moral principles. It requires thought, reflection, debate, and conversation. That is, time.

In the Trump reality TV series THE US GOVERNMENT, there was no discussion, at least in public, of just war theory. Are Christians who are largely responsible for this theory and its incorporation into the Geneva Conventions simply going to abandon this tradition because we’re on to the next episode?

In announcing the bombing of Iran’s nuclear installations, Trump proclaimed, “Iran’s key nuclear enrichment facilities have been completely and totally obliterated.” But when he faced fierce pushback because it would require a good deal of time to evaluate how effective the bombing had been, he strongly protested. The Iran episode was over; time to move to the next episode starring Donald Trump. The attack was right because the B-2 bombers had destroyed the Iranian facilities. A purer declaration of might makes right is hard to imagine. An evil had been destroyed. Besides, it played well on TV. What other questions were there?

But is that right? Are we to abandon so easily a Christian ethical guideline with so little thought?

I apologize for the lateness of this blog. In the schedule of the Donald Trump TV series The US GOVERNMENT, I am already three or four episodes late. But I reflect at a printing press rate. Thinking takes time. Are we going to give up on that?

‍