Search

Military personnel encounter moral dilemmas during deployments and in their work environment at home. Moral dilemmas are situations in which two mutually exclusive actions exist, embodying conflicting values. Dealing with moral dilemmas requires moral competence. There is a growing awareness of the need to address the ethical dimension of working in the armed forces. However, experience with and knowledge about how to train moral competence in educational settings within the armed forces is limited.

Military personnel encounter moral dilemmas during deployments and in their work environment at home. Moral dilemmas are situations in which two mutually exclusive actions exist, embodying conflicting values. Dealing with moral dilemmas requires moral competence. There is a growing awareness of the need to address the ethical dimension of working in the armed forces. However, experience with and knowledge about how to train moral competence in educational settings within the armed forces is limited.

Militairen worden regelmatig geconfronteerd met morele dilemma’s, zowel tijdens uitzendingen als in Nederland. Een moreel dilemma definiëren wij als een situatie waarin een keuze moet worden gemaakt tussen verschillende elkaar uitsluitende handelingsalternatieven, waarbij waarden met elkaar in conflict zijn. Het omgaan met morele dilemma’s stelt de morele competentie van Defensiemedewerkers op de proef. Binnen Defensie is aandacht voor de morele dimensie van het werk van belang. Dat komt onder andere tot uitdrukking in het ethiekonderwijs voor militairen. In dit proefschrift onderzoeken wij daarom de vraag: hoe kan de morele competentie van militairen bevorderd worden door middel van ethiekonderwijs? Dit onderzoek is gebaseerd op een kwalitatieve onderzoeksmethode. Dit stelt ons in staat om kritisch te reflecteren op specifieke ervaringen en leerprocessen tijdens het ethiekonderwijs en al doende de theorie en praktijk van ethiekonderwijs en trainingen verder te verbeteren. De case study met betrekking tot ethiekonderwijs die in ons onderzoek centraal staat is de 9-daagse Verdiepingscursus Militaire Ethiek (VME) (in het Engels: train-the-trainer course on military ethics). In de verschillende deelstudies—die corresponderen met artikelen en hoofdstukken in dit proefschrift – gebruiken we verschillende vormen van empirisch materiaal: semigestructureerd interviews, participant observation en notities gemaakt door verschillende trainers tijdens de training. Een centraal begrip in de verschillende deelstudies is het begrip ‘morele competentie’. We veronderstellen dat voor het bevorderen van morele competentie de volgende zes elementen van belang zijn: (1) Bewust worden van de eigen, persoonlijke waarden en de waarden van anderen; (2) In staat zijn de morele dimensie van een situatie te herkennen en kunnen zien welke waarden op het spel staan, en overtreden of geschonden dreigen te worden; (3) Kunnen oordelen over een morele vraag of dilemma; (4) Over dit oordeel kunnen communiceren; (5) W illen e n k unnen h andelen n aar d it o ordeel o p e en m oreel v erantwoorde m anier; (6) Verantwoording af willen en kunnen leggen aan jezelf en aan anderen.

Militairen worden regelmatig geconfronteerd met morele dilemma’s, zowel tijdens uitzendingen als in Nederland. Een moreel dilemma definiëren wij als een situatie waarin een keuze moet worden gemaakt tussen verschillende elkaar uitsluitende handelingsalternatieven, waarbij waarden met elkaar in conflict zijn. Het omgaan met morele dilemma’s stelt de morele competentie van Defensiemedewerkers op de proef. Binnen Defensie is aandacht voor de morele dimensie van het werk van belang. Dat komt onder andere tot uitdrukking in het ethiekonderwijs voor militairen. In dit proefschrift onderzoeken wij daarom de vraag: hoe kan de morele competentie van militairen bevorderd worden door middel van ethiekonderwijs? Dit onderzoek is gebaseerd op een kwalitatieve onderzoeksmethode. Dit stelt ons in staat om kritisch te reflecteren op specifieke ervaringen en leerprocessen tijdens het ethiekonderwijs en al doende de theorie en praktijk van ethiekonderwijs en trainingen verder te verbeteren. De case study met betrekking tot ethiekonderwijs die in ons onderzoek centraal staat is de 9-daagse Verdiepingscursus Militaire Ethiek (VME) (in het Engels: train-the-trainer course on military ethics). In de verschillende deelstudies—die corresponderen met artikelen en hoofdstukken in dit proefschrift – gebruiken we verschillende vormen van empirisch materiaal: semigestructureerd interviews, participant observation en notities gemaakt door verschillende trainers tijdens de training. Een centraal begrip in de verschillende deelstudies is het begrip ‘morele competentie’. We veronderstellen dat voor het bevorderen van morele competentie de volgende zes elementen van belang zijn: (1) Bewust worden van de eigen, persoonlijke waarden en de waarden van anderen; (2) In staat zijn de morele dimensie van een situatie te herkennen en kunnen zien welke waarden op het spel staan, en overtreden of geschonden dreigen te worden; (3) Kunnen oordelen over een morele vraag of dilemma; (4) Over dit oordeel kunnen communiceren; (5) W illen e n k unnen h andelen n aar d it o ordeel o p e en m oreel v erantwoorde m anier; (6) Verantwoording af willen en kunnen leggen aan jezelf en aan anderen.

"The missions of armed forces are required to be effective. Thus missions are oriented to objectives that help prevent, contain or solve problems. A soldier, for example, who skillfully neutralizes his or her target is not effective when the problem is not prevented, contained or solved. Political, legal and moral awareness is important to the soldier, because doing things right is not the same as doing right or rightful things. The soldier wishes to avoid unlawful orders, but also tries to avoid casualties among non-combatants. Normally responsibility lies with higher authorities, but the fact remains that the soldier is the one who pulls the trigger. It is not simply a matter of veering between two evils, because a mission that is without moral grounds should not have been initiated in the first place and when pursued against better knowing it will probably lose effectiveness in the end. It is impossible to make compromises here. But it is also not possible to foresee all the consequences of military action, and unanticipated consequences can easily backfire. Dilemmas are bound to occur when the soldier is caught up in blurred conflict situations. This volume tries to add to our understanding of the problem of creating and maintaining a balance between effectiveness and moral responsibility."

In using Rawls 'Law of peoples" the author tries to morally justify the internationally acclaimed responsibility. He subsequently answers the question how military force can help to fulfill the 'responsibility to protect'.

As the author puts it, drone strikes have become the icon of the western post-modern style of warfare and they have been the subject of an ongoing debate. Paying due attention to the risk of drone warfare, moral disengagement and questionable legality included, as well as practicalities of the use of drones, Osinga proposes a balanced view. He points out tha that the current debates on drones is a manifestation of the paradox of post-modern warfare in which more precise weapons seem to provoke changes in the western attitudes towards the use of military force.

The authors show that in debates between the old schools of Liberals and Idealists and recent offspring within these schools, the main argument concerns the moral responsibility of states and statesmen. Their discussion of Carr reappear among advocates of present-day humanitarian interventions. They argue that E.H. Carr's critique of idealism is still meaningfull to us, even if more than seventy years have gone by since it was written down. The nature of way may have changed from large-scale conflict to post-modern operations, but we still face the same dilemmas not only on the level of the state, but also on the micro-level of the individual soldier

In using Rawls 'Law of peoples" the author tries to morally justify the internationally acclaimed responsibility. He subsequently answers the question how military force can help to fulfill the 'responsibility to protect'.

The authors show that in debates between the old schools of Liberals and Idealists and recent offspring within these schools, the main argument concerns the moral responsibility of states and statesmen. Their discussion of Carr reappear among advocates of present-day humanitarian interventions. They argue that E.H. Carr's critique of idealism is still meaningfull to us, even if more than seventy years have gone by since it was written down. The nature of way may have changed from large-scale conflict to post-modern operations, but we still face the same dilemmas not only on the level of the state, but also on the micro-level of the individual soldier

"The missions of armed forces are required to be effective. Thus missions are oriented to objectives that help prevent, contain or solve problems. A soldier, for example, who skillfully neutralizes his or her target is not effective when the problem is not prevented, contained or solved. Political, legal and moral awareness is important to the soldier, because doing things right is not the same as doing right or rightful things. The soldier wishes to avoid unlawful orders, but also tries to avoid casualties among non-combatants. Normally responsibility lies with higher authorities, but the fact remains that the soldier is the one who pulls the trigger. It is not simply a matter of veering between two evils, because a mission that is without moral grounds should not have been initiated in the first place and when pursued against better knowing it will probably lose effectiveness in the end. It is impossible to make compromises here. But it is also not possible to foresee all the consequences of military action, and unanticipated consequences can easily backfire. Dilemmas are bound to occur when the soldier is caught up in blurred conflict situations. This volume tries to add to our understanding of the problem of creating and maintaining a balance between effectiveness and moral responsibility."

As the author puts it, drone strikes have become the icon of the western post-modern style of warfare and they have been the subject of an ongoing debate. Paying due attention to the risk of drone warfare, moral disengagement and questionable legality included, as well as practicalities of the use of drones, Osinga proposes a balanced view. He points out tha that the current debates on drones is a manifestation of the paradox of post-modern warfare in which more precise weapons seem to provoke changes in the western attitudes towards the use of military force.