For centuries, philosophers, theologians, and intellectuals have pondered the legitimacy of war. And suddenly everything changed.<\/p>\n
A new way of thinking has been gaining ground in various fields for some time now, even within the Church: the belief that rightful wars no longer exist<\/strong>, an expression that for a long time referred to those wars in which one side could claim to be right because it had been the victim of armed aggression<\/strong> by another country. In fact, for centuries nations have been organizing armed forces to guarantee their defense against possible aggression, a fact that occurs not only in the great powers, but also in small countries<\/a> and even in the least populated and smallest country in the world<\/a>.<\/p>\n The reason for the existence of armies is the same as that of police forces<\/strong>. While the latter have the mission of guaranteeing peace and security for citizens within a country's borders against the actions of criminals, armed forces face the challenge of the existence of major criminals who use threats and aggression to subjugate entire nations<\/strong>, whether they are powerful terrorist organizations without a state apparatus behind them or even terrorist states like Russia and Iran<\/strong>.<\/p>\n When assessing the legality of a war, we must begin with a fact that many tend to ignore: criminal regimes and organizations do not care about the morality of their actions<\/strong>. We have seen this in recent years with the large-scale Russian invasion of Ukraine, which began in 2022, and with Hamas's terrorist attack against Israel in 2023. It is democratic and civilized countries that subject their actions to the scrutiny of ethics and morality<\/strong>, placing limits on their own actions. But the existence of these limits should not make us forget one thing: crime and wars have existed since the dawn of humanity<\/strong>, and nothing indicates that they will ever cease to exist, because there are human beings prone to doing evil, and this, unfortunately, will never change<\/strong> no matter how much good people want to avoid conflict.<\/p>\n Today, a nation without an army would be as suicidal as a country without police or a home without a door.<\/strong> The absence of armed forces is a luxury only nations living in threat-free zones, like Costa Rica, or countries protected by others, like Iceland, can afford. Neutrality and pacifism have never guaranteed any country protection from aggression.<\/strong><\/p>\n Understanding humanity for what it is, and avoiding confusing our reality with our desires, having armed forces is necessary, and the work done by their members should be a cause for gratitude<\/strong>. I am referring, of course, to those countries where these forces fulfill their duty with honor and respect for human rights. If we don't have an even more chaotic world today, it is not thanks to the efforts of pacifists<\/strong>, who too often focus on some conflicts while ignoring others without a second thought, but rather to the existence of armies that deter potential aggressors.<\/strong><\/p>\n On paper, it might seem like a very good idea to claim that rightful wars no longer exist<\/strong>, an idea that will surely be applauded by many intellectuals who tend to confuse their dreams with the real world. However, this has dangerous consequences, such as believing that an attacked country has no right to defend itself<\/strong>, and that what it should morally do is surrender or negotiate a humiliating and unjust peace with any aggressor. This would give free rein to all the bullies<\/strong>, especially the most powerful ones, because while they are freed from all moral constraints, their victims are often blamed simply for not wanting to submit to criminals who commit atrocities like those perpetrated by Russia and Hamas.<\/p>\n ---<\/p>\n
\n