2020 IB Extended Essays

International Baccalaureate Diploma Program

EXTENDED ESSAY S - 20 20

Please ... Feel free to browse and read through the full extended essays of our 20 20 Year 12 IB Diploma students.

- History - E conomics - Mathematics - History - Visual Art s - English A Literature - Economics - History - Visual Art s - Music - Visual Arts

1. Anthony McKenna 2. Ahmet Cuhadaroglu 3. Soojung (Clare) Hong 4. Sarah-Anne Hornsey 5. Grace Louie

6. Isla Clancy 7. Jack Daly 8. Katrina Howard 9. Michelle Ooi 10. Minjae Kyeong 11. Romany Carlsen-Wareham

© International Baccalaureate Organization 2012.

International Baccalaureate Diploma Program

THE EXTENDED ESSAY

The International Baccalaureate® (IB) Diploma P rogramme (DP) is an assessed programme for students aged 16 to 19. It is respected by leading universities across the globe. Somerset offers the IBDP as an alernative to the Queensland Certificate of Education in Years 11 and 12. Through the DP, we aim to develop students who: - have excellent breadth and depth of knowledge - flourish physically, intellectually, emotionally & ethically - study at least two languages - excel in traditional academic subjects - explore the nature of knowledge through the programme’s unique theory of knowledge course.

THE IB DIPLOMA PROGRAMME CURRICULUM The DP curriculum is made up of six subject groups and the DP core, comprising theory of knowledge (TOK), creativity, activity, service (CAS) and the extended essay. Through the DP core, students reflect on the nature of knowledge, complete independent research and undertake a project that often involves community service.

WHAT IS THE EXTENDED ESSAY?

The extended essay is an independent, self- directed piece of research, finishing with a 4,000-word paper.

THE EXTENDED ESSAY PROVIDES:

One component of the International Baccalaureate® (IB) Diploma Programme (DP) core, the extended essay is mandatory for all students.

P ractical preparation for undergraduate research an opportunity for students to investigate a topic of special interest to them, which is also related to one of the student's six DP subjects. Through the research process for the extended essay, students develop skills in: - formulating an appropriate research question - engaging in a personal exploration of the topic - communicating ideas - developing an argument.

Participation in this process develops the capacity to analyse, synthesize and evaluate knowledge.

© International Baccalaureate Organization 2012.

November 2020

International Baccalaureate Diploma November 2020 Extended Essay in History

‘Jus in bello’: an evaluation of Oliver Cromwell’s invasion of Ireland

TO WHAT EXTENT WAS CROMWELL’S CAMPAIGN IN IRELAND (1649 -1653) A VIOLATION OF HUGO GROTIUS’ DOCTRINE ‘ON THE LAW OF WAR AND PEACE’ (1625)?

IB HISTORY EXTENDED ESSAY | WORD COUNT: 3928

by Anthony McKenna

Jus in bello

gyh992

Contents

Introduction................................................................................................................................2

Historical Considerations...........................................................................................................3

Jus ad bellum – Just War or Solemn War ..................................................................................4

Jus in bello – Conduct of War....................................................................................................5

Killing of Non-Militant Peoples.............................................................................................5

Destruction of Property ..........................................................................................................6

Responsibility for Actions......................................................................................................8

Comparison to Contemporary Commanders .............................................................................8

Comparative Case Study: King Gustavus Adolphus of Sweden............................................9

Comparative Case Study: The Sack of Magdeburg ...............................................................9

Comparison to Historiographical Perspectives ........................................................................10

Conclusion ...............................................................................................................................11

Appendices...............................................................................................................................13

Appendix 1: An Extract from Oliver Cromwell’s letter to William Lenthall on the Siege of Drogheda, 17 September, 1649 ............................................................................................13

1

Jus in bello

gyh992

Men have been led in dark paths, through the providence and dispensation of God.

Oliver Cromwell (1657)

Introduction

In 1649, Oliver Cromwell invaded Ireland with the English New Model Army to reassert

sovereignty on behalf of the new Commonwealth. About 41% of Ireland’s population was

killed due to fighting, disease, and famine during the invasion. Consequently, Cromwell is subject to an enduring controversial and passionate historical debate. 1 For example, in

Cromwell: An Honourable Enemy , historian Tom Reilly defends Cromwell, arguing the

orthodox line that, “there is absolutely no evidence to substantiate the stories of the [Drogheda] massacre,” 2 which was a notorious event during his invasion. By contrast, the revisionist historian Alan Axelrod argues that his actions were “… something very nearly approaching genocide.” 3 To resolve the opposing historical perspectives, I decided to objectively evaluate

the actions of Cromwell against criteria from Hugo Grotius’ doctrine De jure belli ac pacis , or

known today as On the Law of War and Peace (1625). I selected Grotius’ published laws of

warfare as it was a renown contemporary derivative of the ‘just war’ and ‘solemn war’ theories.

Additionally, for contextualisation, I analysed Cromwell’s military actions with a

commensurate military leader, namely Gustavus Adolphus of Sweden. This benchmarking

was necessary because, although Grotius’ work may have been theoretically ground-breaking,

if not conducted in practice, then Cromwell could not be judged to have violated the normative

standards for warfare during the Age of Reason. My analytical framework for evaluating

Cromwell’s actions has not been used by historians, to my knowledge. This is surprising

because this approach proved highly effective for responding to my inquiry question on the

extent to which Cromwell’s invasion of Ireland (1649-1653) violated the laws of war,

according to Hugo Grotius’ Doctrine ‘On the Law of War and Peace’ (1625). After applying

Grotius’ theorical doctrine, I find that Cromwell’s reasons for invading Ireland complied with

the theory of jus ad bellum . However, Cromwell’s actual execution of the war violated the

articles of jus in bello and the standards inferred by Adolphus’ campaigns. Hence, today,

Cromwell would be on trial in The Hague.

1 Noel M. Griffin, “How many died during Cromwell’s campaign?” History Ireland, published December 2008, http://www.historyireland.com/cromwell/how-many-died-during-cromwells-campaign/ . 2 Tom Reilly, Cromwell: An Honourable Enemy (London: Phoenix, 2000). 3 Alan Axelrod, Profiles in Leadership (Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall Press, 2002).

2

Jus in bello

gyh992

Historical Considerations

Before analysing Cromwell’s invasion, it is relevant to discuss a range of key factors to

establish the rationale for going to war. Between 1639 and 1651, the Three Kingdoms of

Britain, Ireland, and Scotland were ravaged by civil war. During this period the Irish Catholics,

who had been exploited by the English and Scottish Protestants with unfair land treaties,

rebelled in 1641. This conflict resulted in thousands of Protestant deaths and the formation of

Confederate Ireland. These Protestant deaths were not forgotten by Oliver Cromwell, who at

this stage was only a parliamentarian. Later, after Cromwell attained leadership and executed

the King of England in 1649, would he have an opportunity for retribution. Cromwell’s ire

was further inflamed early in the same year when Confederate Ireland signed an alliance with

the English Royalists, whose goal was to restore the monarchy in England. This factor, along

with avenging Protestant deaths, motivated Cromwell to invade Ireland. Cromwell was also

motivated by the need for money. As England had been financially devastated by the civil war, Cromwell wanted to pay back creditors through land tracts in Ireland. 4

The historical context of Grotius’ doctrine On the Law of War and Peace (1625) is equally

important to understand. Much of the first half of the 1600’s witnessed the devastation of

Europe due to the Thirty Years’ War. Lasting from 1618 to 1648, the war claimed millions of

lives, the majority being civilians. The war also drastically changed Europe’s political dynamics. 5 However, during the conflict, jurist Hugo Grotius wanted to promote peace, and

thus published his most well-known work, “ On the Law of War and Peace ”, in 1625.

Importantly, Grotius’ doctrine began to gain international credibility eight years after its

publication when five separate European nations invited him to join their public service.

Grotius’ ‘just war’ theory received widespread admiration, which will be explained later.

Indeed, Law of War had numerous editions published and universities taught Grotius’ principles. As such, Grotius was invited to diplomatically organise alliances. 6 Hence, the

work’s influence and importance in international codes of law, especially in relation to warfare,

cannot be understated. It is for these reasons that I decided to use it as the evaluative criteria

for Cromwell’s invasion of Ireland. As case studies, there are two main notorious events in

4 Micheál Ó Siochrú, God's Executioner: Oliver Cromwell and the Conquest of Ireland (London: Faber & Faber, 2008). 5 Peter Hess, “The Thirty Years’ War as Foil for the War in Syria,” Cultures Contexts, published September 16, 2018, https://sites.utexas.edu/culturescontexts/2018/09/16/the-thirty-years-war-as-foil-for-the-war-in-syria/ . 6 David Jayne Hill, The Rights of War and Peace (New York: M Walter Dunne, 1901), 11-17.

3

Jus in bello

gyh992

Cromwell’s campaign that will be analysed by using Grotius’ criteria: the Siege of Drogheda

(11 September, 1649) and the Sack of Wexford (11 October, 1649).

Jus ad bellum – Just War or Solemn War

Before analysing the battles at Drogheda and Wexford using Grotius’ theories, it must first be

established whether Cromwell’s invasion of Ireland was, as Grotius articulated, a ‘just war’ or

a ‘solemn war’. In other words, the theory of jus ad bellum in relation to Cromwell’s rationale

for going to war will be investigated. While the idea of a ‘just war’ had been laid out previously

by other scholars, Grotius expanded on the idea while also introducing the concept of a ‘solemn war’, of which what the causes are as well as what is permissible are both entirely different. 7

A ’just war’, as detailed in Book 2 of Grotius’ seminal doctrine, involves two differing parties

on unequal standing ground. One of the parties is the aggressor, who commits some form of

injury that starts the war, while the other party is the victim of aggression, who is just and has

ample reasoning to go to war. According to Grotius, the injury must be a violation of human

rights, and hence a ‘just war’ is justified on terms laid out by the laws of nature. In contrast, a

‘solemn war’ is caused by violations of the laws of nations rather than of nature. Each party

stands on equal legal ground, and third-party intervention is discouraged and disallowed.

Given that the parties are legal equals, punishment for most occurrences in the war is not necessary, with a few exceptions such as rape and use of poison. 8 Thus, a solemn war is

different to a just war in that there are more permissible reasons for going to war.

Grotius explained the just and unjust causes of war at great length, and upon analysing his

writings and preceding events, Cromwell’s invasion clearly fits the criteria for jus ad bellum ,

or a just war. There are a range of determinate factors to support this conclusion, but the

overriding factor is the rebellion in Ireland in 1641. In Book 2 of Grotius’ doctrine, he explains

that liberty is a part of the human nature that precedes all human conditions, and that to go to

war over such a desire would be unjust (Chapter 22, Section XI). Therefore, it is a reasonable

assessment that Ireland acting justly when it receded from the British monarchy in 1641,

forming Confederate Ireland. Furthermore, when a politic body has been broken up through

means such as rebellion, then the rights of those people are broken until a new governing body

7 Lokur et al., Philosophical Foundations of International Criminal Law: Correlating Thinkers (Brussels: Torkel Opsahl Academic EPublisher, 2018). 8 Lokur et al., Philosophical Foundations .

4

Jus in bello

gyh992

is formed (Chapter 9, Section V). Hence, any legal rights that the British had over Ireland

would have ceased to exist following the 1641 Rebellion, being replaced by the self-governing

rights of Confederate Ireland. Arguably, Cromwell’s 1649 invasion, with intent to destroy the

liberty of the Irish, places him and his army as the unjust aggressors. Evidence to promote the

Irish as being just can be seen also in Book 2 (Chapter 1), which lists a number of cases in

which defence is just, including defence of property, defence of life, all of which were under

threat from the British army. While there is compelling evidence that Cromwell was seeking

revenge for the 1641 Rebellion, which left thousands of Protestants dead, it is important to note

that a major cause of this rebellion was the plantation of Protestants in Ireland by the British monarchy, 9 an event which violates the right of property as described in Book 2 (Chapter 1, Section XI). 10 Therefore, with both the 1641 Rebellion and Oliver Cromwell’s invasion of

Ireland determined to be just wars, Cromwell’s actions can now be compared against the

criteria for what action are permissible in that just war.

Jus in bello – Conduct of War

The theory and practise of just warfare is known as jus in bello . Cromwell’s actions in both

the Siege of Drogheda and the Sack of Wexford will be tested against a number of criteria

devised from Grotius’ doctrine in order to determine how just Cromwell and his army were

during their invasion.

Killing of Non-Militant Peoples

The killing of civilians and other non-militant peoples is considered unjust in a just war, and

the evidence establishes Cromwell and his army as guilty of this. Furthermore, this violation

of the law is compounded because of Cromwell’s complicity in battle, to the extent that it is an

egregious violation. In Book 3 (Chapter 11, Sections VIII to XV), Grotius outlines the types

of people that should be spared in a just war. Grotius stated, “one must take care, so far as is

possible, to prevent the death of innocent persons, even by accident,” before going on to list

other social groups that should be spared. This includes children, women, old men, farmers,

9 Micheál Ó Siochrú, God’s Executioner . 10 Hugo Grotius, “General Rules from the Law of Nature Regarding What is Permissible in War; With a Consideration of Ruses and Falsehoods,” De jure belli ac pacis (Paris: Nicolas Buon, 1625), quoted in Francis W. Kelsey, On the Law of War and Peace , ed. Arthur E. R. Boak et al.(Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1925)

5

Jus in bello

gyh992

religious workers, merchants, prisoners of war, and those who have surrendered unconditionally. 11

Oliver Cromwell and his men violated this tenet by killing civilians in both the Siege of

Drogheda and the Sack of Wexford. In Drogheda, following a week-long siege, Cromwell launched a direct assault to breach the town’s walls on 11 September, 1649. 12 In the heat of the moment, “[Cromwell] forbade [his soldiers] to spare any that were in arms in the town,” 13 and allowed the killing of numerous friars and civilians. 14 In fact, upon finding several soldiers hiding in the steeple of St. Mary’s Church, under Cromwell’s orders, the steeple was set alight, with any who fled being killed on the spot. 15 The one surviving civilian account from Drogheda

details numerous soldiers purposefully shooting at sheltering civilians. While there is no

precise death count, it is estimated to be around 3,000, with Cromwell himself admitting that this figure included “many inhabitants”. 16 These actions are in clear violation of the law laid

out by Grotius, killing not only civilians, but also those who had surrendered, and hence

Cromwell’s actions at Drogheda were entirely unjust. In the Sack of Wexford, Cromwell’s

forces attacked in the middle of surrender negotiations, leaving a surprised Irish garrison that

put up little to no resistance. The soldiers as well as a heavy number of civilians were soon

slaughtered. As Cromwell himself put it, his men “…put all to the sword, that came in [their] way”. 17 According to one clerical account, “the blood lust of soldiers filled the streets and houses”. By the end of the ordeal, Cromwell estimated that over 2,000 people had been killed, a value including both soldiers and civilians alike, while he only lost 20 of his men. 18 Similarly

to Drogheda, the Sack of Wexford involved widespread killing of civilians and non-militant

persons. Therefore, in relation to killing non-militant peoples, the evidence shows conclusively

that Cromwell and his violated the appropriate laws of warfare to quite a great extent.

Destruction of Property

The destruction of property is unique in Grotius’ doctrine as his arguments on the topic differ

greatly depending on whether the conflict in question is a just war or a solemn war? According

11 Hugo Grotius, De jure belli ac pacis 12 Simon Adams, “Siege of Drogheda,” Encyclopædia Britannica, published 2019, https://www.britannica.com/event/Siege-of-Drogheda . 13 See Appendix 1. 14 Oliver Cromwell, letter to William Lenthall, September 17, 1649. 15 Tom Reilly, Cromwell: An Honourable Enemy . 16 Micheál Ó Siochrú, God’s Executioner . 17 Oliver Cromwell, letter to William Lenthall, October 11, 1649. 18 Micheál Ó Siochrú, God’s Executioner .

6

Jus in bello

gyh992

to Book 3 (Chapter 12, Section I), in the case of a just war, there are three conditions in which

the destruction of property is permissible: when it is a necessity to survive, to solve a debt or

inequality, or if there is a deserving of “evil”. Grotius expands on his points, stating that if

destruction of property reaps no benefits then it should not be done. Then, in Section II, Grotius

states that if the property is profitable, its destruction should be refrained from. One of the more

notable laws he outlines – notable considering the context of the Thirty Years’ War – is in

Section VI, where he explains the position of sacred places. Grotius theorises that while they

can be destroyed with impunity in a solemn war, in a just war, if they cause no harm, they

should be preserved, “…particularly among those who worship the same God, in accordance

with the same law, even if perhaps they disagree in respect to certain doctrines or points of ritual.”. 19 The destruction of property was chosen as the second criteria to analyse as many of

the facilities in both Drogheda and Wexford were heavily damaged following their respective

battles.

The historical evidence is arguably unclear on whether Cromwell’s actions on the destruction

of property were permissible as the judgement relies on the vague wording of Grotius. The

fact that Cromwell destroyed property, however, cannot be denied due to the voracity of the

primary sources. During the Siege of Drogheda, Cromwell found numerous Irish soldiers

hiding in the steeple of the town’s St. Mary’s Catholic Church. Upon discovering this,

Cromwell himself ordered that the church be set alight. Those who remained in the church perished, while those who fled were struck down and killed on the spot. 20 This is in clear

violation of the law outlined in Book 3 (Chapter 12, Section VI), as a sacred place that caused

no harm was destroyed. Even more property was destroyed in the Sack of Wexford. Cromwell

had planned to use the town as a winter base for his army, due to its port and infrastructure.

However, in the town’s sacking, its facilities were so badly damaged that Cromwell had to change his plans, with heavy repairs being necessary to fix the widespread destruction. 21 It is

difficult to determine that this violates Grotius’ laws, as there is reasonable justification that

the Irish were deserving of “evil”. However, what is clear is that the damage to the town

violated at least part of the law, as destroying the port and other facilities yielded no military

benefits to Cromwell, and in fact set them back by ruining their plan. Therefore, in terms of

destruction of property, Cromwell at least partially violated the laws of war.

19 Hugo Grotius, De jure belli ac pacis. 20 Tom Reilly, Cromwell: An Honourable Enemy . 21 Micheál Ó Siochrú, God’s Executioner .

7

Jus in bello

gyh992

Responsibility for Actions

If it is concluded that Cromwell’s army violated some of the laws of warfare laid out in Grotius’

doctrine, then it is also important to recognise who should take responsibility for such actions.

While the responsibility of soldiers could be considered as well, here there will be a focus on

whether the historical evidence lays the blame on Cromwell. In Grotius’ work, in Book 2

(Chapter 21 Section II), he explains that, “a community, or its rulers, may be held responsible

for the crime of a subject if they know of it and do not prevent it when they could and should

prevent it.” Here, by referencing the Ancient Roman statesmen Cicero and Augustine, Grotius

outlines that inaction in stopping a crime is, in itself, a crime, and that “Whoever fails to oppose an act, when he can, gives his consent to it.” 22

The primary sources from Ireland show that, in the Siege of Drogheda, Cromwell himself can

be seen as responsible for any misdeeds that occurred, as he ordered his troops in the battle.

However, the evidence for the Sack of Wexford is less conclusive. Cromwell’s troops

opportunistically attacked Wexford while they and the Irish were in the midst of peace negotiations, initiating the battle on their own terms. 23 Despite this, however, Cromwell did not stop his soldiers, and rather assisted them with additional orders once the town was breached. 24 Therefore, it can be argued that Cromwell, in spite of not ordering the attack in

Wexford, can be held responsible for both allowing it to continue and later encouraging it, a

clear violation of the law described earlier in Book 2 (Chapter 21, Section II). Since a military

commander takes responsibility for all the misdeeds of their army, then Cromwell can be

deemed to have violated Grotius’ laws to an extreme extent.

Comparison to Contemporary Commanders

Overall, Cromwell violated Grotius’ laws of warfare. However, while Grotius’ work has been

determined as being highly influential in developing international law, it is possible that his

laws were not universally accepted during the Age of Reason. This means that a comparison

between Cromwell and his contemporaries must also be conducted. An effective analysis of

22 Hugo Grotius, De jure belli ac pacis. 23 “What is the Story Behind Cromwell’s Bloody Sack of Wexford?” History Hit, published October 11, 2016, https://www.historyhit.com/day-cromwell-sacks-wexford/ . 24 Micheál Ó Siochrú, God’s Executioner .

8

Jus in bello

gyh992

Cromwell against other leaders and battles allows for a greater ability to evaluate the extent of

which Cromwell violated the accepted laws of warfare.

Comparative Case Study: King Gustavus Adolphus of Sweden

King Gustavus Adolphus of Sweden was one of the prominent Protestant leaders during the

Thirty Years’ War, and both his military prowess and adherence to Grotius’ laws of warfare

make him a very notable figure. His title of Gustavus Adolphus the Great, the only Swedish

monarch to have that title, made Sweden into a strong empire in Europe, implementing previously unseen military techniques. 25 However, he also attempted to uphold the numerous

laws of warfare described by Grotius. Perhaps the best example of this was during his

consolidation of power in the north-east Holy Roman Empire, when, in 1631 (six years

following the release of Grotius’ book), he prohibited his soldiers from “marauding and plundering.” 26 King Gustavus Adolphus also did not hide his admiration for Grotius; it is said

that he kept a copy of On the Law of War and Peace next to his bible under a pillow.

Furthermore, Adolphus highly commended Grotius to his High Chancellor of Sweden, Oxenstierna. 27 Adolphus’ high status in Sweden and among Protestants would have made him

almost the standard for all of what a military commander should aim for. While it is worthy of

an extensive inquiry to deduce whether each of Adolphus’ conflicts were just or solemn, it can

be concluded that by prohibiting marauding and plundering, he is adhering to the idea of a just

war, as such actions would be permissible in a solemn war. Hence, with Adolphus, a highly

respected leader, following the laws laid out by Grotius on the laws of a just war. By contrast,

Cromwell egregiously violated these normative ‘standards’ of warfare.

Comparative Case Study: The Sack of Magdeburg

While the lawful practices of King Gustavus Adolphus are a good model, there are many

examples of violations of war by other leaders and armies, especially in the Thirty Years’ War.

One of the most infamous and notorious battles of the war is the Sack of Magdeburg in 1631.

The city, having been besieged for two months, was eventually assaulted by the surrounding

troops. As soon as the walls were breached, many buildings (including houses) were set alight,

25 Michael Roberts, “Gustavus Adolphus,” Encyclopædia Britannica, published July 20, 1998, https://www.britannica.com/biography/Gustav-II-Adolf . 26 Oliver C. Prinz, Der Einfluss von Heeresverfassung und Soldatenbild auf die Entwicklung des

Militärstrafrechts (Göttingen: V&R unipress, 2005). 27 David Jayne Hill, The Rights of War and Peace , 11-17.

9

Jus in bello

gyh992

and civilians were slaughtered, raped, and tortured. The eyewitness account from the Mayor of

Magdeburg says the following:

Accompanied by unspeakable, terrible cries and much hullabaloo, many thousands of innocent men, women, and children were murdered and slaughtered in all sorts of merciless and wretched ways, so that words alone cannot adequately describe these acts nor tears adequately bemoan them . 28

In all, an estimated 20,000 inhabitants lost their lives, and with much of the city having been

burnt down, the city could not sustain itself. It is important to note that, as the sack was a

result of the city refusing to pay a tribute to the emperor, that this battle would likely be

considered a solemn war rather than a just war. Despite this, even with the additional

permissions in a solemn war, rape is still considered illegal, making the Sack of Magdeburg a

clear violation of Grotius’ doctrine. However, given that it has been historically concluded that

the Sack of Magdeburg was an exception rather than the norm in terms of its violence and brutality 29 , it would be unwise to justify Cromwell’s actions in Ireland by promoting the Sack

of Magdeburg as a contemporary, comparative event.

Comparison to Historiographical Perspectives

I have already briefly mentioned two historians with varying claims on the extent of Oliver

Cromwell’s brutality, and following my own analysis, I will now scrutinise their claims more

closely. First, Tom Reilly in Cromwell: An Honourable Enemy focuses on the idea that there was a lack of evidence to substantiate the claims of Cromwell’s violence and brutality. 30 This is a deficient historical argument, as many of Cromwell’s own letters detail his army’s acts in Ireland. 31 While these letters describe Cromwell favourably, it is also relevant that the reason

there are so few other primary sources detailing Cromwell’s actions in Drogheda and Wexford

is due to the annihilation of potential witnesses. Reilly also corroborates his claim and defence

of Cromwell by mentioning that he would occasionally punished his troops for misdeeds and

excessive pilfering. However, arguing this is more difficult, as it begins to bring in ethical

questions such as whether good deeds can sufficiently compensate for bad deeds. Overall,

28 Friedrich Wilhelm Hoffmann, Geschichte der Belagerung, Eroberung und Zerstörung Magdeburg’s von Otto von Guericke, ChurfürstlichBrandenburgischem Rath und Bürgermeister besagter Stadt (Magdeburg: Baensch, 1860), quoted in Julie K. Tanaka, “A Local Apocalypse – The Sack of Magdeburg (1631),” in From the Reformation to the Thirty Years War, 1500-1648 , ed. Rainer A. Müller (Stuttgart: P. Reclam, 1996). 29 Micheál Ó Siochrú, God’s Executioner . 30 Tom Reilly, Cromwell: An Honourable Enemy . 31 See Appendix 1.

10

Jus in bello

gyh992

Reilly’s argument for the defence of Oliver Cromwell is not substantiated by the evidence.

However, historian Alan Axelrod in Profiles of Leadership argues differently, accusing Cromwell of war crimes, going so far as to compare his actions to near-genocide. 32 It is worth

mentioning that Axelrod’s argument claiming genocide is problematic due to the imprecise

definition of genocide, especially when regarding Cromwell’s actions. However, unlike Reilly,

Axelrod makes use of the first-hand accounts from Ireland, and validates that Cromwell

violated the laws of war. It is necessary to point out, however, that both historians did not judge

Cromwell by the same criteria or legal standard, in this case by Grotius’ doctrine, and thus it

should be mentioned that they may interpret Cromwell’s invasion of Ireland as either a just or

a solemn war. This classification could radically affect their final evaluations of Cromwell.

Thus, while comparisons with other historians’ views on the invasion are beneficial, it is

important to recognise the limits of this analytical framework.

Conclusion

By applying Grotius’ legal theories to Cromwell’s actions in both Drogheda and Wexford, it is

clear that the historical evidence is sufficient to find him guilty of egregiously violating the

laws of war. First, it was determined that Cromwell’s invasion complied with the theory of jus

ad bellum , as his forces were the unjust aggressors towards the Irish, who were just. Second,

the violation of Grotius’ jus in bello laws was evinced by the mass killings of civilians, razing

of property, and numerous other punitive actions. A further investigation into Cromwell’s

comparison with Gustavus Adolphus finds him out of step with other military commanders.

Notably, Cromwell’s sieges in Ireland are equivalent to the recognised worst atrocity of the

time: the Sack of Magdeburg. Indeed, Magdeburg condemns rather than exonerates Cromwell.

Finally, a historiographical analysis reveals that Cromwell’s degree of guilt is disputed because

historians use different evaluative criteria. Therefore, an objective application of Grotius’ laws

are essential to break the deadlock on the historical debate on Oliver Cromwell’s invasion of

Ireland in 1649. When these contemporary laws are applied, I find sufficient evidence that

Cromwell violated the laws of warfare and the slaughtering of civilians and razing of property

disregarded the standards of warfare. As attributed to Cromwell, “paint me as I am. If you

leave out the scars and wrinkles, I will not pay you a shilling.”

32 Alan Axelrod, Profiles in Leadership .

11

Jus in bello

gyh992

References

Adams, Simon. 2019. Siege of Drogheda. Accessed March 25, 2020. https://www.britannica.com/event/Siege-of-Drogheda.

Axelrod, Alan. 2002. Profiles in Leadership. Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall Press.

Griffin, Noel M. 2008. How many died during Cromwell’s campaign? December. Accessed July 28, 2020. http://www.historyireland.com/cromwell/how-many-died-during- cromwells-campaign/.

Grotius, Hugo. 1625. On the Laws of War and Peace. Unknown. Translated by Francis W Kelsey. Paris: Nicolas Buon.

Hess, Peter. 2018. The Thirty Years’ War as Foil for the War in Syria. Accessed March 20, 2020. https://sites.utexas.edu/culturescontexts/2018/09/16/the-thirty-years-war-as- foil-for-the-war-in-syria/.

Hill, David Jayne. 1901. "V. The Influence of Grotius’s Work." In The Rights of War and Peace , edited by 1st, 11-17. New York: M Walter Dunne.

History Hit. 2016. What is the Story Behind Cromwell’s Bloody Sack of Wexford? Accessed March 28, 2020. https://www.historyhit.com/day-cromwell-sacks-wexford/.

Lokur, Madan B., Gregory S. Gordon, Pedro Lopez Barja de Quiroga, Kaius Tuori, Hanne Sophie Greve, Tallyn Gray, Pablo Kalmanovitz, et al. 2018. Philosophical Foundations of International Criminal Law: Correlating Thinkers. Brussels: Torkel Opsahl Academic EPublisher.

Ó Siochrú, Micheál. 2008. God's Executioner: Oliver Cromwell and the Conquest of Ireland. 1st. London: Faber & Faber.

Prinz, Oliver. 2005. Der Einfluss von Heeresverfassung und Soldatenbild auf die Entwicklung des Militärstrafrechts. 1st. Göttingen: V&R unipress.

Reilly, Tom. 2000. Cromwell: An Honourable Enemy. 1st. London: Phoenix.

Roberts, Michael. 1998. Gustavus Adolphus. Accessed March 30, 2020. https://www.britannica.com/biography/Gustav-II-Adolf.

Tanaka, Julie K. 1996. A Local Apocalypse – The Sack of Magdeburg (1631). Accessed March 30, 2020. http://germanhistorydocs.ghi- dc.org/pdf/eng/85.SackMagdeburg_en.pdf.

12

Jus in bello

gyh992

Appendices

Appendix 1: An Extract from Oliver Cromwell’s letter to William Lenthall on the Siege of Drogheda, 17 September, 1649

Divers of the Enemy retreated into the Mill-Mount; a place very strong and of difficult

access; being exceedingly high, having a good graft, and strongly pallisadoed. The Governor,

Sir Arthur Ashton, and divers considerable Officers being there, our men getting up to them

were ordered by me to put them all to the sword. And indeed, being in the heat of action, I

forbade them to spare any that were in arms in the Town: and, I think, that night they put to

the sword about 2,000 men;—divers of the officers and soldiers being fled over the Bridge

into the other part of the Town, where about 100 of them possessed St. Peter's Church-

steeple, some the west Gate, and others a strong Round Tower next the Gate called St.

Sunday's. These, being summoned to yield to mercy, refused. Whereupon I ordered the

steeple of St.' Peter's Church to be fired, when one of them was, heard to say in the midst of

the flames: "God damn me, God confound me: I burn, I burn."

13

ECONOMICS EXTENDED ESSAY

"To what extent, has the increase in Turkish interest rates from 17.75% to 24% in 2018, impacted the Turkish Lira in US dollar terms?"

Subject: Economics Examination Session: November 2020

March 20, 2020 Words: 3999 Supervisor: Dane Oman

By Ahmet Cuhadaroglu

Abstract

The past 5 years Turkey has endured difficult times as the economy struggled to escape its reliance on foreign financial resources for economic activity. Being in high levels of debt and running a current account deficit truly harmed the Turkish Lira. Turkey implemented contractionary demand side policies to possibly appreciate the lira and become more competitive in the global market. Therefore, this assignment covers, "To what extent, has the increase in Turkish interest rates from 17.75% to 24% in 2018, impacted the Turkish Lira in US dollar terms?" This question also explores the effectiveness of a monetary policy decision to alter exchange rates. Secondary research was conducted to obtain background knowledge on the topic of exchange rates and interest rates, whilst primary research was conducted in order to acquire a more specific knowledge on the topic, which is particularized to the chosen country (Turkey). Economists in Turkey were interviewed, and they provided essential information on both how interest rates directly impact exchange rates and how Turkey’s specific condition impacted the outcome. However, if the essay only covered Turkey’s outcome, the statement “ To what extent” would not be addressed, hence the monetary policy was compared to a similar decision made by the UK’s central bank as they increased interest rates from “0.5% to 0.75%”. Research conducted for the UK matched the ones for Turkey to directly address the extent of currency appreciation. It was concluded that Turkey achieved a greater extent of currency appreciation compared to the UK as they were able to impact the determinants of exchange rates more effectively such as, GDP, inflation, current account, trade balance and the reverse multiplier. However it must also be considered that Turkey’s increase in interest rates was much larger, hence a greater extent of currency appreciation was theoretically expected.

Words: 298

2

Table of Contents

ABSTRACT ..................................................................................................................................................................... 2

INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................................................................ 4,5 -Methodology:................................................................................................................................................................... 5

BODY ......................................................................................................................................................................... 6, 18 -Analysis of Turkey’s Contractionary Monetary Policy:............................................................................................ 6, 10 -Analysis of UK’s Contractionary Monetary Policy:................................................................................................ 11, 15 -Analysis of the Reason behind the Difference In Results ...................................................................................... 16, 18

CONCLUSION ............................................................................................................................................................. 19

BIBLIOGRAPHY .................................................................................................................................................... 20,21

3

Introduction:

In the last two decades, when external financial resources were cheap, Turkey became dependent on short- term foreign financial sources. They pursued borrowing based and construction industry-oriented growth strategies. (ALKİN, 2020) This resulted in further over-reliance on external foreign resources and a depreciating currency. The gradual increase from 17,75% to 24% was an attempt to make Turkey more competitive in the global market Therefore, this assignment covers "To what extent, has the increase in Turkish interest rates from 17.75% to 24% in 2018, impacted the Turkish Lira in US dollar terms?" The purpose of this research question is to test the economic theory behind interest rates as a determinant of exchange rates for Turkey. The question addresses how effective choosing to raise interest rates was, for the aim of currency appreciation. This decision was also made based on the issues Turkey faced regarding political dilemmas. Towards the end of these decades, the central bank of the United States(US) began to use monetary policy to make USD more valuable in the global exchange market. This was also followed by the Trade war between the US and China resulting in protective policies, sanctions, and external interventions from the US against Turkey. (Harper, 2018) Being a developed country, Turkey was negatively impacted by these decisions. The government and the firms of Turkey had issues regarding paying and renewing debts. (ALKİN, 2020) All of these dilemmas resulted in the Turkish Lira(TRY) losing its value in the global market. Ultimately, unemployment increased, domestic demand and supply decreased, and economic growth was slowed down. Based on these issues, after June 2018, the Turkish central bank began to increase the weekly interest rate which have been low for decades. (Financial Turbine, 2018)Initially it was increased from (8% to 16,50%). This was followed by another increase on June 8th from (16,50% to 17,75%). Finally, on September 14th, the interest rate was increased from (17,75% to 24%). These interest rates remained stable until July 2019 where they were decreased again.

4

To examine how the monetary policy decision impacted the TRY, the determinants of currency appreciation will be analysed and applied to the context, hence the economic theory central to the topic are interest rates and exchange rates. However it must be recognised that the analysis does not cover many external issues such as political dilemmas and external policies such as, reserve ratio, bank deposit tax rate arrangements and consumption taxes. The economic phrase ceteris paribus will be mentioned to acknowledge the possibility that monetary policy may not be the sole reason for altering currency values. (Jocelyn Blink, 2012) Furthermore, to answer the “To what extent” statement of the question, the effects of Turkey’s policy will be compared to the UK’s use of contractionary monetary policy. Finally, the reasons behind the difference will be investigated using other economic determinants such as, current account deficits, inflation rates and multiplier values for both countries. The research question was explored using secondary to obtain background knowledge on the topic of exchange rates and interest rates, whilst primary research was conducted in order to acquire specific knowledge on the topic of exchange rates which is particularized to the chosen country. Judgement sampling was used to particularize the areas of knowledge concerned with exchange rates and my own prior knowledge. The impact of a change in interest rates and the determinants of exchange rates were researched to identify which topics were to be researched more thoroughly. These topics were then altered to the specific country and the interview questions were formed accordingly. Two economists in Turkey were interviewed to gain specific knowledge on exchange rates and interest rates particularly in Turkey. This combined with knowledge obtained through secondary research helped form the argument of how interest rates impacted exchange rates in Turkey. Methodology:

5

BODY:

- Analysis of Turkey’s Contractionary Monetary Policy:

Since monetary policy is a demand side policy, a rise in interest rates would directly impact the factors of aggregate demand; consumption, investment, government spending, exports, and imports. (Jocelyn Blink, 2012) These factors also make up the formula for Gross Domestic Product(GDP). The “6.25%” increase in interest rates would make Lira more expensive in the Turkish economy hence lowering the factors of aggregate demand ultimately slowing the economy down. Therefore, this policy can be recognised as a contractionary monetary policy. (Economics Beta, 2016) The impact of the increase in interest rates can be seen in Figure 1 below.

An increase in interest rates would subtract money out of the economy, hence 7.25% increase has shifted the supply of Turkish Lira(TL) from S1 to S2 as seen in the graph above. This can also be seen as the quantity of TL decreased from Q1 to Q2, which has resulted an in increase in Price, “P1 to P2” as seen in Figure 1 above. This represents how money became more expensive to borrow in the Turkish economy hence, impacting the factors of GDP (Jocelyn Blink, 2012), which is explained in Figures 2, 3 and 4 below.

6

7 Since GDP is recognised as an economic indicator of how a country is performing. A higher GDP attracts higher foreign investment due to speculations of the currency appreciation given the recent economic performances. (LIOUDIS, 2019) Therefore, a contractionary monetary policy may not be the best decision for the aim of the appreciation of the Turkish Lira, whilst the GDP is already negative. However, based on the law of demand, lower prices attract higher the demand. Therefore a decrease in inflation ( to 1 and The increase in interest rates has decreased the supply of money, hence making the TL more costly as seen in Figure 1. This has caused a shift in aggregate demand(AD) from “ September 2018 to December 2018 , Figure 2" . This can also be seen as Turkey experienced an “8.9%” decrease in consumption and a “12,9%” decreas in business investment. (ALKİN, 2020) Therefore, it can be said that the increase in interest rates has slowed the economy down which can also be seen in Figure 4, as the GDP growth rate before September was “-1.2%” compared to after the policy where the GDP was measured to be “-2.8”. (Trading Economics, 2018). Furthermore, the shift in AD has also lowered the average price level(APL) from ( to 1 , 2 ) showcasing a decrease in inflation in the Turkish economy. This is reinforced by the Inflation table in Figure 3 (Trading Economics, 2018), as the inflation fell from “25.24% to 21.62%” further perpetrating Turkey’s aim of slowing the economy down using contractionary monetary policy with the ulterior motive of appreciating their currency. (Trading Economics, 2018)

“25.24% to 21.62%”), lowers price for domestic goods hence attracting a higher demand for Turkish products. This results in a higher amount for exports consequently impacting the appreciation of the Turkish Lira positively. (Economics Beta, 2016)

The lowered price of goods caused by the increase in interest rate has led to a positive impact to Turkey’s Trade and Current Balance according to the TCMB(Central Bank of Turkey). When the policy was implemented, the Trade Balance went from “-927,00” to “1.047,00” as seen in Figure 5 (ALKİN, 2020) . However, the value has had a negative value for the remainder of 2019. To further authenticate the discussion, Current Balance was taken into consideration due to the inclusion of the net amount received for domestically owned factors of production used abroad. As seen in Figure 6, the current balance has increased from “1.853,00 to 3.043,00” showcasing a change of “64.2%”, ceteris paribus (ALKİN, 2020) . Although the remainder of the year still has been negative. This can be due to the political issues Turkey has faced such as the Trade Wars. As a result, the information obtained from Figures 5 and 6, demonstrate an increase in Turkey’s exports at the end of 2018. In addition, the higher interest rates can also attract foreign demand for the currency due to the desire of having higher returns for investments. This coupled with the lowered inflation, has increased the exports of turkey by “8,7%” in the 4th quarter of 2018 which, in relation to the research question, is beneficial for the aim of appreciating the value of the Turkish Lira.

8

The 8,7% increase of Turkey’s exports demonstrate a rise in demand for Turkish Lira, hence the demand curve to shifts right from 1 to 2 as seen in Figure 7. The graph showcases the value of Turkish Lira in terms of US dollars. The rise in demand has led to an increase in output from 1 to 2 , showcasing an increase in the amount of USD, 1 Turkish Lira can purchase. This can also be seen as the price increases from 1 to 2 . This price increase can also be recognised in Figure 8 (Trading Economics, 2018) as the value of TL increased against the US after September, as 1USD = 6.5TL fell to 1USD = 5.5TL, ceteris paribus. (Jocelyn Blink, 2012) When a country uses monetary policy, this directly impacts the supply and demand of money and therefore, the 7.25% increase in Turkish interest rates would subtract money from the economy which would lower the amount of TL flowing the economy hence, decreasing supply. (Economics Beta, 2016) The impacts of this result can be seen in Figure 9 below.

9