In the former case, Aquinas basically argued that for a war to be just it must meet three criteria: it must be waged upon the command of a rightful sovereign (which Putin is not), it needs to be waged for a just cause on account of some wrong the attacked have committed (which saving certain regions from the “neo-Nazism” of the Ukraine and/or establishing the foundations for revitalization of the former Soviet Union does not qualify), and it needs to waged with the intent to promote good and to avoid evil (which denying the right to self-determination, invading sovereign borders without cause, causing millions of people to be displaced, engaging in arbitrary bombing of nonmilitary targets, killing civilians, attacking humanity corridors, etc., would be the opposite).
Equally, there are a number of more simple frameworks that attempt to provide additional guidance. One example is the seven rules for fighting a just war: one, it has to be a last resort (which the invasion of Ukraine is not); two, it must be declared by a legitimate authority (Putin’s Russia is not); three, it has to be fought to right a wrong (Ukraine was established through a democratic process); four, you have to have a shot at winning it (which Putin might have); five, the goal should be to restore peace (the invasion shattered the peace); six, you should only be as violent as you have to be to right the wrongs (again, bombing civilian targets, killing innocents, and attacking human corridors are excessive as there are no wrongs to be righted); and seven, you only kill the combatants (not happening)..1
When persons and states violate such norms, prosecutors and the wronged rely on international agreements such as the Hague Conventions (which, in 1899, set out the rules for war) and the Geneva Conventions (which, in 1907, was designed to protect the victims of war) to bring states and persons to account. States can also impose sanctions on aggressors, as has been done with Putin and his cronies to limited effect. All of which points to the fact that, though important for trying to hold individuals and states accountable, these are of limited means for understanding intent or predicting what actions will come next.
Authoritarian Paradigms of Analysis
This difficulty of trying to determine intent so to understand causes and anticipate future acts is what pushed theorists to create paradigms (or frameworks) for providing context. One such theory or framework is authoritarianism, which is loosely defined as a “governmental or political system, principle, or practice in which individual freedom is held as completely subordinate to the power of the state, centered either in one person or a small group that is not constitutionally accountable to the people.” Authoritarianism serves as a convenient category in which to place governments that liberal democracies find threatening to their geopolitical standing and way of life – namely, one party systems, fascist states, kleptocracies, military juntas, theocratic republics, centrally controlled communist states, etc.
Using this framework, supporters and representatives of liberal democracies should be – and are – increasingly concerned about the future. Freedom House, a non-profit, majority U.S. government funded organization in Washington, D.C., conducts research and advocacy on democracy, political freedom, and human rights. In its February 2022 report, entitled Freedom in the World - 2022: The Global Expansion of Authoritarian Rule, the organization found “authoritarian regimes have become more effective at co-opting or circumventing the norms and institutions meant to support basic liberties, and at providing aid to others who wish to do the same.” Additionally, a total of 60 countries suffered declines in personal liberties in the past year, while only 25 improved. As of today, some 38 percent of the global population live in Not Free countries, the highest proportion since 1997. Only about “20 percent now live in Free countries.”2
It goes without saying that such trends – and, if not checked, Putin’s push into Ukraine – will embolden both those who rule through such
8