97

In this article, I argue in favor of an entirely new Geneva Convention that will be exclusively centered on the vital problems that follow the end of wars. There are numerous international laws that frame the beginning of war and the way wars are fought. In addition, several of these laws assume a strategic significance and a moral sense. In order to complete our analysis of the numerous impacts of war on international life, we therefore need to consider the end phase of war. The objective of this article is to construct a general theory of the plausible principles that could guide communities that seek to justly and decently resolve their armed conflicts. We can turn to two important and contrasting models of justice after war?: revenge and reconstruction. I criticize the model of revenge by examining the peace accords that followed World War I, and later the first Persian Gulf War. Then I suggest that the objective of justice after war should be the construction of what one could call 'a regime of minimal justice'? in the state of the defeated aggressor. Based on what we learn from history, I delineate what I call a recipe of ten steps to lead the process from beginning to end.