For a war to be just three conditions are necessary - public

In the ancient and noble struggle of war, where the fates of nations and the lives of men hang by a thread, the questions of justice and morality rise to the surface. Throughout history, war has been both glorified and condemned, praised as a means of achieving greatness, yet reviled for the suffering it brings. Ernest Hemingway, a man who lived through the horrors of World War I and witnessed the devastation of battle, offers a profound reflection on the nature of just war: "For a war to be just, three conditions are necessary—public authority, just cause, and right motive." These words, though spoken many decades ago, remain timeless in their truth, reminding us that not all wars are righteous, and that the path to war must be tread with the utmost caution, guided by clear principles that serve both justice and the common good.

Public authority is the first condition Hemingway speaks of, and it refers to the necessity that a war must be declared and executed by those who are recognized as the rightful rulers of a nation or group. In the ancient world, this was clear. The Greek city-states, for example, would go to war under the authority of their elected leaders, such as generals or kings, and the decision to engage in battle was a matter of public duty, not personal ambition. In Rome, wars were declared by the Senate, and military campaigns were often undertaken in the name of the Roman people, who held the authority to support or oppose war. For a war to be just, the leadership must have the legitimate authority of the people behind it. Without this, the war becomes a personal vendetta or a power grab, an illegitimate act that causes only harm.

The second condition, just cause, speaks to the very heart of the matter. War must not be waged without a cause that is morally right and necessary. The ancient Romans, though often fierce and expansionist, recognized the importance of just causes in battle. Their wars of conquest, though brutal, were often framed as necessary to defend the Roman Empire from invaders or to protect Roman citizens from those who would oppress them. In World War II, the United States entered the war with a just cause: to stop the Nazi regime’s brutal conquest of Europe and the atrocities of the Holocaust. The cause was clear, and the goal was just—to free the oppressed, to end tyranny, and to restore peace to the world. A just war must be a response to injustice, not an opportunity for glory or conquest. The war, in its cause, must reflect the highest ideals of humanity, striving for the restoration of justice, freedom, and peace.

Right motive is the final condition, and it speaks to the internal drive behind the decision to go to war. This condition is a deeply personal and ethical matter. It speaks to the intentions of the leaders and the soldiers who fight. Hemingway understood well the difference between a war fought for glory or revenge and one fought for true justice. In the ancient world, leaders like Alexander the Great and Cyrus the Great were driven by a mix of ambition and idealism, conquering vast swaths of land in the name of their gods or empires. Yet, history often looks back at these figures with a critical eye, questioning whether their motives were truly aligned with the values of justice or simply the pursuit of personal power. Similarly, the soldiers who fight in a just war must be driven by a sense of duty and moral responsibility, not by hatred or the desire for personal gain.

The importance of these conditions is made even clearer when we look to the Vietnam War, a conflict where the United States waged war with dubious authority, a cause that many began to question, and motives that were often unclear. The war was sold to the public as a fight to stop the spread of communism, yet, as the war dragged on, it became clear that the motive of the American government was more about preserving political power than about freeing the people of Vietnam. The lack of clear authority, the questionable cause, and the mixed motives led to a war that fractured American society and left millions in Vietnam and surrounding countries suffering from the devastating consequences. This example serves as a reminder that not all wars are just, and the price of fighting without clear cause and motive can be tragically high.

Hemingway’s three conditions for a just war—public authority, just cause, and right motive—are more than philosophical musings; they are a guide for us all. They offer a moral framework that can help us discern whether a war is truly justified, or if it is the result of self-interest and political manipulation. In our own time, where the prospect of war is never far from the horizon, these conditions should weigh heavily on our hearts and minds. Political leaders must be held to account, for their decisions have far-reaching consequences. The cause of any conflict must be examined not just for its righteousness but for its broader moral implications, and the motives driving those who call for war must be questioned to ensure that they serve not personal ambitions, but the greater good of humanity.

Finally, the lesson Hemingway offers us is a reminder that war is not an isolated event but a moral act with consequences that stretch far beyond the battlefield. Each of us must be vigilant in recognizing the signs of an unjust war, and we must hold those in power to the highest standards of justice and integrity. Let us seek to follow the wisdom of Hemingway, Socrates, and the other great minds of history who understood that while the cost of war is inevitable, the decision to go to war must never be taken lightly, and only when it is truly just should we raise the banner of battle. May we, in times of peace and war alike, strive to uphold these principles in all our actions, and work tirelessly to create a world where justice prevails, and war is a last resort, not the first option.