2020 IB Extended Essays

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