(Un)just Wars - An analysis of Israeli discourse in Gaza 2008-2009 and Lebanon 2006

Abstract: Many attempts at explainging the difficulty of the discrepancy between between the discourses of the Israeli Arab conflict have been made by many scholars throughout the years. This thesis will focus on two different cases of the greater conflict; the Gaza War in 2008-2009, and the Lebanon War in 2006. The attempt is to analyze the discourse of righteousness in both cases, based on an understanding gained from earlier research. The use of theories of Jus ad Bellum and Jus in Bello, combined with a discourse analysis of who has legitimacy and who has not, which case is just and who is the real victim of the Middel East conflict combine the ground on which the inquiry is conducted. The finding indicates both opportunities to update and improve international law, as well as show the difficulty of determining legal aspects of war. Both cases show that Israel claims to have been attacked by the other party previous to the response.