Trump’s Iran Strikes Comport with Just War Theory
Drawing on Michael Walzer’s landmark text Just and Unjust Wars, a new analysis argues that Operation Epic Fury — the ongoing U.S. strikes on Iran — is morally defensible across every jus ad bellum condition of classical Just War Theory.
Contra many critics on the left in Congress, the media, and academia — as well as some on the right — who have condemned President Trump’s strikes on Iran as unjust, analyst Gregory Moore, writing in Providence Magazine, argues that Operation Epic Fury is in fact justified according to the centuries-old framework of Just War Theory.
“Whether or not Epic Fury will prove to have been a prudent decision remains to be seen,” Moore writes, “but from an ethical perspective it is certainly defensible.” Drawing specifically on Just and Unjust Wars by philosopher Michael Walzer, Moore works through each of the five jus ad bellum conditions in turn.
Moore argues just cause is established on four grounds. First, Iran effectively declared war on the United States as far back as 1979 with the storming of the U.S. Embassy in Tehran and the taking of 66 American hostages. He notes Iran was responsible for the deaths of 241 U.S. service members in Beirut in 1983, and that Iran-backed forces killed over 600 Americans in Iraq between 2003 and 2011. On October 7, 2023, Iranian proxy Hamas killed 48 Americans and took 12 more hostage.
Second, Iran and what Moore calls “The Three H’s of the Apocalypse” — the Houthis, Hamas, and Hezbollah — have waged war against U.S. ally Israel for decades. Third, Iran’s long pursuit of nuclear weapons, given its leaders’ explicit calls for Israel’s destruction, makes prevention a rational act of self-defense. Fourth, Moore points to a human rights rationale, given the Iranian regime’s killing of an estimated 30,000 of its own citizens in recent months.
“Iran declared war on the United States in 1979. The U.S. has had a rationale for attacking Iran in the sense of self-defense for some time.”— Gregory Moore, Providence Magazine, March 6, 2026
Legitimate Authority: As Commander-in-Chief of U.S. Armed Forces, President Trump holds the constitutionally recognized authority to prosecute military action against Iran.
Right Intention: Moore argues Trump appears to be pursuing the policy not for personal benefit, oil, or territorial gain, but to bring Iran to the negotiating table and end its nuclear weapons program — goals he had pursued through diplomacy before turning to military force.
Last Resort: Given multiple rounds of failed negotiations under both Trump and previous administrations, and Iran’s continued intransigence on nuclear weapons, Moore finds it reasonable to characterize the strikes as a last resort.
Proportionality: The Shiite theocratic dictatorship ruling Iran since 1979 is responsible for thousands — perhaps millions — of deaths, including through its proxies across Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, Gaza, and Yemen. Moore argues Operation Epic Fury is not disproportionate given the scale of damage the regime has already inflicted, and the catastrophic danger of a nuclear-armed Iran.
Moore notes that Iran’s recent strikes on ten nations not directly involved in the fighting — including the UAE, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Jordan, Iraq, Kuwait, Turkey, and Azerbaijan — have only strengthened the U.S. case. These attacks on American friends and allies were, in Moore’s assessment, entirely unprovoked, further validating the just cause for the response.
“In conclusion, it seems clear that the Trump Administration can argue with confidence that its campaign against Iran is justified with regard to the jus ad bellum requirements of Just War Theory.”— Gregory Moore, Providence Magazine
About The Author
Discover more from Faith & Freedom News - FFN
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.