In Jus Post Bellum, Jens Iverson provides for the first time the Just War foundations of the concept, reveals the function of jus post bellum, and integrates the law that governs the transition from armed conflict to peace.

While most studies of just war focus on the rationale for going to war and the conduct of the war, this important book examines the period after the conflict. What must be done to restore justice? In the words of the authors, “’Victory’ is declared by presidents and other leaders, yet all too often no just peace is to be found in the wake of today’s conflicts. . . . After the smoke clears, the powers that be may declare ‘mission accomplished’ when, as Ezekiel long ago said, there really is no peace.”

Justice After War is aimed especially to both undergraduate and graduate students, as well as the general audience who want to understand the significance of a recent development within the just war tradition, namely, the increasing attention given to the category of jus post bellum (postwar justice and peace). While examining the interrelated challenges of moral and social norms in both political and legal domains, as well as church practices, this work proposes an innovative methodology for linking theology, ethics, and social science so that the ideal and the real can inform each other in the ethics of war and peacebuilding. The main task of this project, then, is to identify what the author views as three key themes of jus post bellum, and three practices that are essential to implementing jus post bellum immediately after a war: just policing, just punishment, and just political participation. David Kwon endeavors to challenge the view of those who suggest that reconciliation, mainly political reconciliation, is the foremost ambition of jus post bellum. Instead, he attempts to justify the proposition that achieving just policing, just punishment, and just political participation are essential to building a just peace, a peace in which the fundamental characteristic must be human security. It thus demonstrates that human security is an oft-neglected theme in the recent discourse of moral theologians and that a more balanced understanding of jus post bellum will direct attention to the elements composing human security in a postwar context.

As contemporary studies have increasingly viewed just post bellum to the concept of peace, or the law of peace, so opinions concerning what a 'just peace' could look like have diverged. Is it merely an elusive ideal? Or is it predominantly procedural justice? Is it dependent on concessions and compromise? In this volume, the third output of a major research project on Jus Post Bellum, Carsten Stahn, Jens Iverson, and Jennifer Easterday bring together a team of experts to explore the issues surrounding a just peace, what it is composed of, and how it makes itself felt in the modern world, concluding that a just peace is not only related to form and

Jus Post bellum: Restraint, Stabilisation and Peace seeks to answer the question “is restraint in war essential for a just and lasting peace”? With a foreword by Professor Brian Orend who asserts this as “a most commendable subject” in extending Just War Theory, the book contains chapters on the ethics of war-fighting since the end of the Cold War and a look into the future of conflict. From the causes of war, with physical restraint and reconciliation in combat and political settlement, further chapters written by expert academics and military participants cover international humanitarian law, practicalities of the use of force and some of the failures in achieving safe and lasting peace in modern-day theatres of conflict.

Jus post bellum is the body of international legal norms and rules of international law that applies to a post-conflict situation as it moves to a status of peace. This book provides a detailed legal analysis of all aspects of jus post bellum, and uses case studies to show its relevance to the reality of situations on the ground.