For months now, the news has been dominated by the possibility of an impending attack on Iraq by the United States. It now appears that such an attack will begin within days if not hours. This proposed war is said by the United States to be a preemptive attack to prevent future danger to the United States, based on the belief of the United States government that Iraq possesses chemical and biological weapons, in violation of the weapons restrictions to which Iraq has previously agreed. In these circumstances, Catholics are once again faced with a question that has faced them many times in the past: is this a morally just war?

There has been disagreement among Catholics on the question of war with Iraq. The Pope and most of the bishops, both worldwide and in the United States, have staked out relatively clear anti-war positions on the issue. On the other hand, some Catholics, particularly in the United States, have claimed that the attack on Iraq, as well as other potential preemptive attacks, is necessary for the United States in the changing conditions of the modern world, and can be reconciled with the Catholic moral tradition concerning war. The Catholic Church has consistently taught that war can sometimes be morally permissible, but only under certain very strict conditions. The question Catholics must answer is whether a United States attack on Iraq, or indeed any similar preemptive attack considered by the United States in the future, would meet the strict conditions imposed by morality.

Catholic teaching on the morality or immorality of war has revolved for centuries around the traditional just war doctrine. Those unfamiliar with the just war doctrine may understandably think it means only that there must be a just cause for war. In fact, though, the just war doctrine as it is understood in the Catholic Church is far more restrictive than that. In order to justify war, it is not nearly enough for a nation merely to have a just grievance against another nation. Of course a nation must have a cause that is morally right in order to go to war, but that is only a prerequisite to any discussion at all of whether a war would be justified under a specific set of circumstances. The conditions under which a war can be considered just from a Catholic perspective are set forth clearly in the Catechism of the Catholic Church, paragraphs 2308 and 2309.

Before the Catechism even sets out the conditions for a just war, it makes very clear one universal principle about the justification of war: a just war can only be defensive. The only reason that war is ever morally right at all is that "governments cannot be denied the right of lawful self-defense." Therefore, meeting the conditions for a just war is only possible in the case of "legitimate defense by military force." This raises immediate difficulties for the justification of preemptive strikes, which at first glance appear to be offensive wars. This is why many people think that it is questionable whether any preemptive strike really qualifies as a just war. However, an argument can be made that preemptive strikes are in a certain sense defensive in nature. In theory, such strikes are made only in order for a nation to defend itself against the possibility of future attacks. So, while they are superficially offensive, their purpose is ultimately defensive, and it is worthwhile to think about whether a preemptive attack could meet the conditions laid down in the just war doctrine.

There are four conditions given in the Catechism for a just war. Two of these conditions, the third and fourth conditions on the list, do not apply to preemptive wars any more than any other type of war, so perhaps they should be addressed first. The third condition is that "there must be serious prospects of success," and the fourth is that "the use of arms must not produce evils and disorders graver than the evil to be eliminated." These conditions could conceivably be met by a preemptive war, and more specifically one can argue that a war on Iraq would satisfy them. The United States obviously would be virtually assured of military success in a war with Iraq, and supporters of the war might argue that the evils that would result if chemical and biological weapons are used in the future would be worse than the evils of a war on Iraq. Opponents of the war could argue that military victory will not bring peace for either the United States or the Middle East, and therefore will not truly achieve success. Further, they might point out that the real evils associated with a war on Iraq would undoubtedly be great, including many casualties. The use of weapons of mass destruction by Iraq, on the other hand, is a possible evil, which may not occur at all, and the danger of which will not necessarily be eliminated by invading Iraq. Both sides may have valid points, and for present purposes it is sufficient to say that reasonable people may disagree on whether an American preemptive attack on Iraq would meet the third and fourth conditions for a just war. However, all four conditions must be met in order for a war to be considered just, and it will become apparent that the first two conditions listed by the Catechism are far more problematic for preemptive wars in general, and an attack on Iraq in particular.

The first condition given by the Catechism as necessary for a just war is that "the damage inflicted by the aggressor on the nation or community of nations must be lasting, grave, and certain." Here we meet the real problem with justifying preemptive strikes. By definition, a preemptive strike is a war launched by a nation that has not yet actually been attacked by the nation against which it is going to war. Granted that a preemptive attack may be defensive in purpose, how can the nation targeted for attack properly be called an "aggressor" when it has not yet attacked at all? Furthermore, how can the attacking nation be certain that it will suffer lasting and grave damage unless it goes to war, when it has not yet been attacked or suffered any damage at all at the hands of the nation which it is attacking?

The second condition for a just war is that "all other means of putting an end to it [the damage] must have been shown to be impractical or ineffective." This drives home the point that the only possible just war that is envisioned here is one in which the nation going to war has already suffered damage inflicted by the enemy. In the case of a preemptive strike, in which there is no current damage to be ended, how can anyone logically say that a war will end the damage, let alone that all other means of ending the damage have been exhausted?

It is hard to imagine any circumstances in which a preemptive attack could meet the first two conditions given by the Catholic Church for the conduct of a just war. However, in relation to the current question of war on Iraq, we do not have to speculate on the possibility of some bizarre set of circumstances under which a preemptive attack might be justified. The circumstances are more or less publicly known, and they clearly do not help to address the concerns raised by these conditions. Whatever Saddam Hussein's behavior may have been in the past, as far as we know Iraq is not currently inflicting and has not recently inflicted any damage in an act of aggression on the United States or the community of nations. An international policy of containment rather than war has succeeded in preventing Iraqi aggression for years now. Furthermore, in the event that the United States does not attack, there will be United Nations weapons inspectors in Iraq for the foreseeable future. Clearly it is not certain that Iraq will inflict lasting and grave damage on the United States or the community of nations in the future if there is no war, nor can it even be said that all peaceful means of lessening the risk of such damage have been exhausted. Therefore, it is impossible for the United States' preemptive attack on Iraq that is currently being contemplated to meet either of the first two conditions identified by the Catholic Church as necessary for a just war.

A great deal has been said in recent months, and indeed ever since September 11, 2001, about the supposedly entirely new conditions that exist in the world in the present time. Perhaps it is tempting in these days to dismiss as outdated the moral principles on war that have been stated in one form or another in the Catholic Church for centuries. However tempting that might be, though, it is ultimately just that: a temptation. There is no valid excuse for abandoning our consciences at the door when we enter difficult times. For Catholics, this means that there is never a good enough reason to abandon the moral principles that have been received from God through the Catholic faith. The doctrine on just war that has been examined here is based firmly on a Catholic understanding of the full implications of the fifth commandment, and "Thou shalt not kill" does not go out of date every time the circumstances in the world change.

Most people have heard the saying, "Those who live by the sword will die by the sword," which comes from the words of Jesus in Matthew 26:52. Christianity is not traditionally a pacifist religion, and properly understood these words do not express pacifism. Violence is not forbidden when one is under attack and it is absolutely necessary. However, as much as everyone may despise and distrust the governing regime in Iraq, Iraq has not attacked the United States. If the United States attacks Iraq, our nation will be using violence, not in legitimate self-defense, but in the pursuit of power, control, and security through aggressive war. This course of action is not only immoral, but also incapable of giving any real security in the end. If the United States attacks Iraq, then the United States is living by the sword, and in doing so is choosing a way of life that cannot and will not last. If one nation is justified in responding to any threat with a war, then other nations will consider that they are justified as well, and there will be an endless cycle of war. The United States is the most powerful nation the world has ever known. However, if this nation chooses actively to perpetuate an international culture of death and violence through aggressive war, then this nation ultimately will fall victim to the very culture of death and violence that it has perpetuated. Those who live by the sword will die by the sword. Realizing this, Catholics in the United States who want what is best for their country should do the truly Catholic and truly patriotic thing, and oppose an American war on Iraq as an unjust war.