The Doctrine of EsM furioso or Necessity Military Necessity Expounded by Viscount Haldane

The doctrine of EsM furioso or necessity military necessity is a legal principle that has been used to justify military actions in times of war. This doctrine holds that military necessity may be invoked to justify actions that would otherwise be considered illegal under international law. Viscount Haldane, a British statesman, jurist and philosopher, was one of the foremost advocates and interpreters of this doctrine in the early 20th century.

Viscount Haldane, whose full name was Richard Burdon Haldane, was born in Edinburgh in 1856 and educated at the universities of Göttingen and Edinburgh. He became a successful lawyer and a Liberal politician, serving as Secretary of State for War from 1905 to 1912, Lord Chancellor from 1912 to 1915, and again from 1924 to 1928. He was also a prominent writer of philosophy, especially on German idealism and pragmatism.

As Secretary of State for War, Haldane implemented important reforms of the British Army, creating the Territorial Force as a reserve organization, establishing a national and an imperial general staff, and improving the mobilization and training of the troops. He also sought to improve the relations between Britain and Germany, visiting Berlin in 1906 and 1912 to discuss naval issues and British neutrality. However, his efforts failed to prevent the outbreak of World War I, in which he supported Britain’s participation.

As Lord Chancellor, Haldane presided over the highest court of appeal in Britain and introduced measures to speed up the judicial process. He also played a key role in drafting the Government of Ireland Act 1914, which granted home rule to Ireland but was suspended because of the war. In 1915, he was forced to resign from the cabinet because of false accusations of being pro-German. He later joined the Labour Party and became Lord Chancellor again in the first Labour government in 1924. He died in 1928.

Haldane’s contribution to the doctrine of military necessity was mainly through his judicial decisions and writings. Haldane contributed to the doctrine of military necessity  He defined military necessity as “the necessity which justifies those measures of regulated violence which are indispensable for securing the ends of war, and which are lawful according to the modern law of war”¹ He argued that military necessity was not a negation but an integral part of international humanitarian law, which aimed to limit the suffering caused by war. He also distinguished between military necessity and Kriegsraison (war reason), a German concept that claimed that necessity in war overrides all legal restraints. Haldane rejected this concept as incompatible with civilized warfare.

Haldane applied the doctrine of military necessity to various aspects of war, such as the treatment of prisoners of war, the occupation of enemy territory, the use of reprisals, and the bombardment of civilian objects. He always balanced the military advantage anticipated from an action against the humanitarian considerations involved. He also recognized that military necessity may vary according to the conflict's circumstances and nature.

Haldane’s doctrine of military necessity was influential in shaping the development of international law and practice about war. His views were cited by various courts and tribunals, such as the Nuremberg Tribunal and the International Court of Justice. His doctrine was also reflected in several treaties and conventions, such as the Hague Regulations of 1907, the Geneva Conventions of 1949, and their Additional Protocols of 1977.

FAQ with answers on the doctrine of EsM furioso or Necessity Military Necessity Expounded by Viscount Haldane:

Q: What is the doctrine of EsM furioso or Necessity Military Necessity?

A: The doctrine of EsM furioso or Necessity Military Necessity is a legal principle that has been used to justify military actions in times of war. This doctrine holds that military necessity may be invoked to justify actions that would otherwise be considered illegal under international law¹

Q: Who was Viscount Haldane and what was his role in expounding this doctrine?

A: Viscount Haldane, whose full name was Richard Burdon Haldane, was a British statesman, jurist and philosopher, who served as Secretary of State for War and as Lord Chancellor in the early 20th century. He was also a prominent writer of philosophy, especially on German idealism and pragmatism. He was one of the foremost advocates and interpreters of the doctrine of military necessity in his judicial decisions and writings. He defined military necessity as “the necessity which justifies those measures of regulated violence which are indispensable for securing the ends of war, and which are lawful according to the modern law of war”² He also distinguished between military necessity and Kriegsraison (war reason), a German concept that claimed that necessity in war overrides all legal restraints. He rejected this concept as incompatible with civilized warfare³

Q: How did Viscount Haldane apply the doctrine of military necessity to various aspects of war?

A: Viscount Haldane applied the doctrine of military necessity to various aspects of war, such as the treatment of prisoners of war, the occupation of enemy territory, the use of reprisals, and the bombardment of civilian objects. He always balanced the military advantage anticipated from an action against the humanitarian considerations involved. He also recognized that military necessity may vary according to the conflict's circumstances and nature.

Q: What was the impact of Viscount Haldane’s doctrine of military necessity on the development of international law and practice about war?

A: Viscount Haldane’s doctrine of military necessity was influential in shaping the development of international law and practice about war. His views were cited by various courts and tribunals, such as the Nuremberg Tribunal and the International Court of Justice. His doctrine was also reflected in several treaties and conventions, such as the Hague Regulations of 1907, the Geneva Conventions of 1949, and their Additional Protocols of 1977.