The Dresden Bombings

Dresden: Morally Just?

Historical Overview:

A Lancaster plane dropping incendiaries upon the city of Dresden

On the 13^th of February 1945, British and American forces conducted a two-day bombing operation upon the German city of Dresden. This attack resulted in an estimated 25 000 casualties, and saw to the widespread destruction of a once culturally iconic city. Whilst such activities were common during wartime, the attack on Dresden remains infamously marred in controversy. Arguments surrounding the Dresden bombings are focused upon three characteristics of the attack. These include, the legitimacy of Dresden as a justified military target, the disproportionate exercise of violence, and the indiscriminate manner in which violence was exerted. This blog aims to critically analyse these concerns in an effort to evaluate the moral justness of the attack. 

Dresden a legitimate target?

Dresden after the bombing

Like many other major German cities during the Second World War, Dresden facilitated a wide variety of war factories. These factories, which composed of 127 in total, produced war materials such as aircraft components, anti-aircraft guns, and munitions. Additionally, due to its central location and its extensive railway lines, Dresden served as both a critical communications centre for the defence of the Eastern Front, and as one of the primary transportation centres of war materials to other major cities and battle grounds including: Berlin, Munich, and Leipzig. For the British and American forces, the city of Dresden was thus deemed a strategically important and legitimate military target, of which its demise would hasten the allied victory. Whilst the strategic military importance of Dresden is undeniable, the determination of the moral justness of the attack requires a more thorough investigation. For such an analysis, an examination of the manner and methods in which violence was conducted is required. 

Illegitimate Exercise of Violence Part 1: Disproportionality

Air Chief Marshal Arthur Harris

According to the Just War principle of Jus in bello, the legitimacy of military action is determined in context to the benefits and harms that its application achieves. If the harms outweigh the benefits inferred by its application, then the action is considered illegitimate and morally unjust. In the Dresden bombings an estimated total of 3,900 tons of explosives were utilized for the destruction of the aforementioned military structures. The satisfaction of these objectives however came at the cost of 25-30 thousand civilian casualties and the absolute destruction of the once culturally iconic German city. Given such excessive applications of force and high casualty rates, critics have argued that the Dresden bombings inflicted more harm than its intended benefit was planned to achieve. Naturally, for these critics the attack on Dresden is perceived of as an illegitimate and unjustified military attack, in which the costs far outweighed the supposed benefits. In an objection to this assertion, military strategists such as Air Chief Martial, Arthur Harris have argued the contrary, and contended that the bombing of Dresden was indeed proportionate. For actors such as Harris, the bombing of Dresden not only aided in the advancement of the Soviet troops progressing through the Eastern front, but also hastened the end of the war, saving the lives of countless numbers of soldiers who were still engaged in battles. However, what actors such as Harris fail to account for is that the rights of soldiers and civilians are entirely different. It is from this aspect that we must examine the moral justness of the bombing of Dresden. 

Illegitimate Exercise of Violence Part 2: Non-Combatant Immunity: 

Just War Theorist Michael Walzer 

In the bombing of Dresden, military targets were undistinguished from civilians. In fact, military objectives were centered specifically around high civilian population zones such as the Ostragehege stadium, and the surrounding timbered town of Alstadt. According to the Jus in bello principle of non-combatant immunity, these actions were comprehensively immoral, unjust, and wholly illegitimate. The basis upon which such assertions are made are founded upon the inextricable relationship held between rights and actions. For example, in his book titled ‘Just and Unjust Wars’, political scholar Michael Walzer notes that actions hold within them, the power to determine what rights are conferred to individuals.  This is because through actions, individuals are able to engage in activities that hold the power to relinquish the rights of another. For instance, soldiers by their very occupation are made into dangerous instruments of war. Consequently, their active participation in their chosen profession provides them with the right to kill and be killed by other soldiers. Civilians however have not relinquished their rights through their participation in war activities are thus afforded the right of immunity. Naturally through this relationship, soldiers are accorded a responsibility to ensure that their actions do not harm those civilians who have surrendered no rights, even if it means at greater risk to themselves. In the bombing of Dresden, this distinction was comprehensively ignored by soldiers who actively participated in the killing of innocent civilians. This act in and of itself was immoral, unjustified, and consequently wholly illegitimate, as it destroyed the rights of those individuals who had not relinquished their rights through war time actions. 

Casualties of the Dresden bombings

Final Remarks:

Was Dresden a legitimate military target?  Yes it was. It was a strategic location with military communications capabilities, where German troops were resupplied and war munitions and machines were transported to the Eastern front. Was it justifiable then to attack Dresden? Yes it was, as the fall of Dresden would have accelerated the end of the war and arguably saved many lives. Was the way in which the attack conducted moral? No. Whilst Dresden was a legitimate military target, the indiscriminate, and disproportionate nature of the violence exercised upon Dresden was completely unjustified and absolutely immoral. Whilst it is not possible to completely safeguard the rights and interests of civilians, it is imperative that whatever care can be taken must be taken not to harm those innocent civilians who have surrendered nothing. In the Dresden bombing civilians were the target as the allies purposefully acted in a manner that ensured maximum civilian casualties. Naturally the Dresden bombing can never be morally justified.