In this landmark in the philosophy of violence, Adil Haque resolves tensions between the law and the morality of war. And he offers a new and discerning critique of the law, at points where the tension is irresoluble. The field has been turned upside-down by revisionists who have challenged the conventional idea that, in a conflict that has credentials as a war, combatants on each side can rightly and lawfully kill each other even if (and this is the case in every such conflict) it is unjust for at least one side to be engaged in the war. The revisionists have said that it may be lawful for combatants to slaughter each other, but it is not right. Haque’s subject is the unbearable hostility that seems to result–a war–between law and morality. His argument has crucial implications at every stage of the apparent conflict. He argues that the law does not authorise immorality, as you may think, because it does not actually authorize the use of violence in an unjust cause. He argues that at some points, morality supports the law more fully than the revisionists have thought (for example, he says that the general legal protection for civilians gives effect to moral principles). And he argues that the law can and should be reformed where the conflict with morality is genuine. In particular, he advocates new and more stringent legal restraints on the use of force against combatants.