ABSTRACT
Contemporary just war theorists often assume that the requirement of just cause applies only to the initial resort to war, and that after war has begun all that matters is how the war is conducted. One important implication of the idea that any engagement in war requires a just cause is that when the just cause of a war has been achieved, continuation of the war lacks justification and is therefore impermissible. Just cause thus determines the conditions for the termination of war. The permissibility of pursuing a discrete just aim by means of war is doubly conditional: it may be pursued if war is already in progress and if the wrong to be prevented cannot be avoided by surrendering on morally acceptable terms. But a unified account of the morality of war ought also to explain why certain forms of action give rise to liability to attack while others do not.
