The Mozi and Just War Theory in Pre-Han Thought

Abstract

China’s Warring States era (481–221 BCE) was marked by cruel, destructive, recurring warfare between the seven major warring states and numerous minor states. This incessant violence gave rise to an impassioned anti-aggression discourse led by the early Warring States philosopher and social activist Mozi and his followers, the most well-known critics of armed aggression. Initially, the Mohists may have simply opposed all military aggression. Later, however, they developed the more nuanced view that, although unprovoked aggression is wrong, defensive warfare—including defensive assistance to cities or states other than one’s own—and punitive aggression are sometimes justified. The writings collected in the Mozi 墨子 implicitly present an elaborate set of criteria by which to evaluate the justification for war. This article will examine these criteria and explore the extent to which they overlap with justifying conditions widely accepted in contemporary just war theory. One key finding will be that the Mohist criteria are so stringent that offensive war can be justified only very rarely and even defensive war is not always warranted.