A CRITIQUE OF WAR AS INSTRUMENT OF PROGRESS AND DEVELOPMENT IN THE PHILOSOPHY OF HEGEL: A DIALOGUE INTO THE RUSSIA-UKRAINE WAR IN THE LIGHT OF INTERNATIONAL LAW

Abstract

This paper interrogates Hegelian notions of war as a rational instrument of historical development and progress in the context of the Russia–Ukraine war and contemporary international law. It considers the thesis that war serves a dialectical role of overcoming stagnation and asserting the ethical life of the State, and promoting the unfolding of the World Spirit, by referencing G. W. F. Hegel's works; the Philosophy of History and Philosophy of Right. Thus, although Hegel argues that warfare is necessary to maintain the vitality of a nation and avoid civil dissolution, this paper undertakes a critique of such claims by uncovering the contradictions that war poses, both the ethical, human, political and legal contradictions of its justification. The paper first provides a discussion and outline of Hegel's claims for war as a rational moment in the progression of the State and freedom, before, using historical-analytical and doctrinal methods to engage in a dialogue with contemporary just-war theory, human rights, distributive and retributive arguments for justice, and post- Hegelian critics to challenge the glorification of warfare as a developmental tool. It then relates this concept to present international developments by interrogating the justifications proffered, and consequences of the ongoing Russia–Ukraine conflict of 2022, through analyzing against the back-drop of the UN Charter, the international law of armed conflict, international humanitarian law and international criminal law; the war’s human, legal, and moral ramifications on statehood, nationhood and the international order. While we might appreciate the Hegelian dialectic for some understanding of how conflict can indeed precipitate political change, the war has revealed the limitations of classifying warfare as either rational or progressive in the twenty- first century and it has argued for alternative routes to achieving world history through peace, human rights and the strengthening of institutional mechanisms of governance and recognition.