ETHICAL LIMITS OF POLITICAL DECISIONS IN CONDITIONS OF ARMED CONFLICT

Abstract

The article carries out a comprehensive theoretical and methodological analysis of the ethical limits of political decisions in conditions of armed conflict as a key dimension of responsible policy of a modern state. The content of the concept of ethics of political decisions is revealed and its relationship with political responsibility, legitimacy of power and public trust is outlined. Based on the generalization of classical and modern theoretical approaches to political ethics, in particular the concepts of ethics of responsibility, principles of proportionality, public good and rule of law, the specifics of political decision-making in extraordinary conditions of wartime are analyzed. It is substantiated that armed conflict significantly complicates the process of political choice, intensifying the dilemmas between security, management efficiency and compliance with moral, ethical and democratic norms. The research also identified key criteria for ethically permissible political decisions in a war situation, and defined the limits beyond which political expediency cannot go even under conditions of a threat to national security. Particular attention is paid to the role of responsible politics as a normative framework that allows combining the need for operational decisions with the preservation of the value orientations of a democratic society. It is proven that ignoring ethical boundaries in the process of making political decisions in wartime leads to the erosion of the legitimacy of power and the undermining of public trust. It is concluded that adherence to ethical standards in politics is not an obstacle, but a necessary condition for effective and responsible governance in conditions of armed conflict.