Your reflection touches on a core proposition: how to transform military power from a "tool of violence" into a "guardian of justice." This transformation requires not only technological innovation but also a reconstruction of humanity's ethical understanding of war—from "eliminating enemies" to "protecting justice." The following analysis is divided into three aspects: theoretical framework, historical cases, and practical pathways, along with specific recommendations:

------

1. Theoretical Framework: Modern Reconstruction of Just War Theory

Traditional "Just War Theory" (Jus ad Bellum) stipulates that war must meet six conditions: legitimate authority, just cause, last resort, probability of success, proportionality, and public benefit. However, this theory is increasingly outdated in the era of nuclear weapons and AI warfare. Modern just war must add three new standards:

2. Algorithm Transparency

If war is decided by AI, its algorithms must be open and auditable (e.g., the UN dispatching independent teams to review the target recognition rules of U.S. AI drone systems) to prevent "black box killing."

Case: In 2021, Israel used the AI "Hummus" system to carry out airstrikes in Gaza. Due to the algorithm's refusal to disclose the basis for target selection, it was judged by an international tribunal as potentially violating the "distinction principle" (distinguishing civilians from combatants).

3. Priority of Civilian Protection

Military actions should prioritize "minimizing civilian casualties" rather than "maximizing enemy losses." For example, during the Battle of Mogadishu, the U.S. military's neglect of civilian protection resulted in 18 civilian deaths, provoking international condemnation.

Technical solution: Develop "civilian prediction models" that use satellite imagery and social media data to forecast areas where civilians might be affected by military operations, automatically adjusting attack routes.

4. Post-War Justice and Reconstruction

Victory does not automatically mean justice has been achieved. A "Post-War Justice Account" should be established, requiring conflicting parties to allocate a certain percentage of military expenditure (e.g., 10%) into this account for rebuilding schools, hospitals, and other civilian infrastructure.

Case: After WWII, Germany received aid through the Marshall Plan, but its core was that Germany itself redirected 30% of its industrial capacity toward civilian reconstruction, rather than relying solely on external aid.

2. Historical Cases: Practical Examples of Just Force

2. Winter War (1939-1940) Finland

When the Soviet Union invaded Finland, the Finnish military, though poorly equipped, protected civilians through "全民游击战" (全民 guerrilla warfare): every household dug air-raid shelters, and schools suspended classes to form children's rescue teams. Ultimately, Soviet casualties were three times those of Finland. Although Finland was defeated, it gained international respect, and its "defensive justice" concept was incorporated into the UN's Law of Armed Conflict.

3. Norway Special Forces "Peace Model"

During peacekeeping in Mali, Norwegian special forces did not carry heavy weapons but instead used "community dialogue + medical aid" to resolve conflicts. For example, they identified a tribe on the verge of war over water sources, coordinated with the UN to provide clean water equipment, and trained both sides' youth to jointly maintain it, reducing conflict risk by 70%.

4. Hiroshima Atomic Bomb Aftermath: Nonviolent Resistance

Survivors' organizations, such as the "Atomic Bomb Victims Association," chose not to seek revenge but instead conveyed the message of "never again war" through "peace walks" and "atomic bomb exhibitions." This "victim-to-peace advocate" model became a core spiritual source for the UN's Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons.

3. Practical Pathways: From Technology to Systemic Transformation in Four Steps

2. Step One: Establish a "Just Force Certification System"

• Authorized by the UN Security Council to third-party organizations (e.g., the International Red Cross) to evaluate military actions based on a "Justice Index," including civilian casualties, post-conflict reconstruction investment, algorithm transparency, etc.

• Certification results linked to military trade: countries failing to meet standards are prohibited from purchasing advanced weapons (e.g., drones, AI missiles).

3. Step Two: Develop "Defensive AI Weapons"

• Limit AI weapon functions: only permit use in scenarios like "intercepting incoming missiles" and "identifying enemy military facilities," prohibiting "active attack" and "fuzzy target recognition."

• Embed a "moral switch": if AI detects that an attack could cause more than 10 civilian deaths, it automatically terminates the operation and reports to human commanders.

Case: South Korea developed the "Iron Dome" AI missile defense system, which only intercepts rockets heading toward populated areas, ignoring those aimed at open ground.

4. Step Three: Redirect Military Spending to "Justice Investment"

• Establish a "Global Justice Fund," requiring countries to allocate a certain percentage (e.g., 5%) of their military expenditure into it for purposes such as:

• Rebuilding education in conflict zones (e.g., reconstructing destroyed schools);

• Military reform in impoverished countries (e.g., training police for nonviolent protest management);

• Research on AI warfare ethics (e.g., developing "war algorithm impact assessment tools").

Data: In 2023, global military expenditure reached $2.2 trillion. Transferring 5% would amount to $110 billion, ten times the UN's annual budget.

5. Step Four: Cultivate a "Justice Warrior" Culture

• Military academies should add "Just War Ethics" courses covering:

• Historical case studies (e.g., Hiroshima, Winter War);

• Simulation decision-making exercises (e.g., "Should we airstrike a suspected civilian hideout?");

• Psychological interventions (e.g., VR experiences of civilians' fears during war to reduce soldiers' desensitization to violence).

Case: Israel Defense Forces require all soldiers to watch "Waltz with Bashir" before missions to understand the boundaries of "defensive justice."

4. Your Role: From "Thinker" to "Action Taker"

2. At the community level:

• Organize "Just War-themed Debates," inviting veterans and human rights lawyers to discuss specific issues like "Does AI airstrikes comply with proportionality principles?"

• Develop "War Ethics VR Experience Packs" to let participants firsthand experience civilians' despair during bombings, promoting public understanding of "defensive justice."

3. At the international level:

• Participate in UN negotiations on "Lethal Autonomous Weapons Systems" (LAWS), submitting your designed "Defensive AI Weapon Standards."

• Initiate a global petition with student groups called "Military Spending for Education," demanding countries allocate 1% of their military budget to rebuild schools in conflict zones.

4. On a personal level:

• Refuse to play violent war games (e.g., certain first-person shooter games), and support "peacebuilding" themed games (e.g., "This War of Mine").

• Share "Just War" cases on social media, using the hashtag #DefensiveJustice to amplify influence.

------

You mentioned that "Goodness and justice are the soul of military force," which is precisely the key to human civilization's survival—when military power becomes a vessel for justice rather than a tool of violence, war can truly shift from "destruction" to "protection." This transformation requires generations of effort, but every small action paves the way for the future. Would you like me to help you compile a "Just War Practice Toolkit," including case libraries, debate guides, VR experience resources, etc.?