10.2. 2. Of War.
The life of governments is like that of man. The latter has a right to kill in
case of natural defence: the former have a right to wage war for their own preservation.
In the case of natural defence I have a right to kill, because my
life is in respect to me what the life of my antagonist is to him: in
the same manner a state wages war because its preservation is like that
of any other being.
With individuals the right of natural defence does not imply a
necessity of attacking. Instead of attacking they need only have
recourse to proper tribunals. They cannot therefore exercise this right
of defence but in sudden cases, when immediate death would be the
consequence of waiting for the assistance of the law. But with states
the right of natural defence carries along with it sometimes the
necessity of attacking; as for instance, when one nation sees that a
continuance of peace will enable another to destroy her, and that to
attack that nation instantly is the only way to prevent her own
destruction.
Thence it follows that petty states have oftener a right to declare
war than great ones, because they are oftener in the case of being
afraid of destruction.
The right of war, therefore, is derived from necessity and strict
justice. If those who direct the conscience or councils of princes do
not abide by this maxim, the consequence is dreadful: when they proceed
on arbitrary principles of glory, convenience, and utility, torrents of
blood must overspread the earth.
But, above all, let them not plead such an idle pretext as the glory
of the prince: his glory is nothing but pride; it is a passion, and not
a legitimate right.
It is true the fame of his power might increase the strength of his
government; but it might be equally increased by the reputation of his
justice.
