War and Terrorism

In this essay I present you with an imaginary scenario. Your task will be to determine a course of action in light of the reading assignments and instructor notes. You must defend your position cogently based upon these readings and your own reasoning.

Scenario: Imagine two neighboring countries A and B. The two countries share a very long border. Country A has plenty of rivers running through it, whereas country B has only one river without which it would become an uninhabitable desert within a few years. The only river that runs through country B crosses a very small portion of country A, a portion adjacent to country B. Country A decides to divert the river by building a dam and a canal. If allowed to do so, no water would reach country B. You are the head of a legitimately elected government of country B. All your attempts to negotiate a reasonable agreement with country A have failed and no third country is willing to intervene.

(*) You are not allowed to change any of the specific facts stated in the scenario. Any other facts not stated you are allowed to introduce to answer any of the questions.

1. Under the circumstances facing your country, would you attack country A in order to control the source of water and prevent country A from diverting the river?

2. Do you think that such an action would conform to the just war theory? In either case make sure you defend your views with respect to the criteria of a just war theory.

3. How would you respond to Hawk’s arguments that favors a pacifist attitude?

I expect a professionally written essay that fully answers all of the above questions.