Catholic just war theory’s colonial legacy shapes modern conflict narratives, obscuring structural violence and imperial power dynamics
Original framing: “‘Just war’ has guided Catholic thinking on conflict for centuries – including criticism of Iran war” — The Conversation - Global
The original framing omits the colonial origins of just war theory, its role in legitimizing European imperialism, and the selective application of its criteria to Western vs. non-Western conflicts. It also ignores the voices of non-Western religious and ethical traditions, such as Islamic just war principles (qital) or African communal conflict resolution frameworks. Historical parallels to other religiously justified wars, such as the Crusades or colonial missions, are absent. Additionally, the perspectives of marginalized communities directly affected by conflicts justified under this theory are excluded.
Medium structural omission detected in mainstream coverage.
The narrative is produced by Western academic institutions and Catholic intellectual circles, often aligned with elite institutions that benefit from maintaining the status quo of global power structures. The framing serves to reinforce the legitimacy of Western-led conflict assessments while obscuring the complicity of Western powers in historical and contemporary violence. The Catholic Church’s historical role in justifying colonial conquests is downplayed, as is the theory’s selective application to non-Western conflicts.
Marginalized communities, particularly in the Global South, have long critiqued just war theory as a tool of Western domination, with figures like Frantz Fanon and Edward Said exposing its role in legitimizing colonial violence. Indigenous leaders, such as the Zapatistas in Mexico or the Māori sovereignty movement, reject state-centered conflict frameworks in favor of communal autonomy and self-determination. Women’s peace movements, from Liberia’s Women of Liberia Mass Action for Peace to the Nobel-winning work of Leymah Gbowee, demonstrate how just war rhetoric silences the gendered impacts of conflict and the leadership of women in peacebuilding. The omission of these voices in mainstream discourse reflects a broader pattern of epistemic violence, where non-Western and non-male perspectives are excluded from shaping global ethical frameworks.
Just war theory’s origins in medieval European imperialism and its selective modern application reveal a deeper systemic pattern: ethical frameworks are not neutral but are shaped by power structures that prioritize Western interests and state sovereignty over communal well-being and ecological balance.