Concepts of just war under President Obama

As a presidential candidate, Barack Obama championed the claim that Washington was rooted in ideology and politics, and not in reason and fact. This was particularly evident in the criticism of his predecessor’s foreign policy decisions, specifically the justification for the war in Iraq. During his campaign, Obama con-tinually remarked that ideology had overridden reality and that pragmatism was needed in how the US justifies the use of armed force. As President, his Nobel Peace Prize acceptance speech reinforced the call for a pragmatic view of war. Change, many hoped, was on the way. After two terms as President the number of armed conflicts involving the US has more than doubled to include a highly controversial drone program of targeted killing. This paper addresses the question of how President Obama’s justification for these conflicts differs from his predecessor. First I discuss the basic concepts of just war theory. Second I will compare differences in the deontological justification of war under Bush and consequentialist justifi-cation under Obama. Third, conclusion will be drawn as to whether President Obama’s ideas of just war represent a change in US foreign policy or if it is effectively the same as before.