With reference to the Kosovo war, we examined how the (un-)justness of military intervention is cognitively constructed. Four types of reinterpretation were hypothesized to relate to positive evaluation of the intervention: minimisation of negative consequences of NATO's intervention, denial of responsibility of the Western countries for the war, blame of Yugoslavia, and justification of the intervention through positive motives. As determinants of evaluation of the war, belief in a just world, militarism-pacifism, authoritarianism, and diffuse political support were taken into account. Hypotheses were tested with 165 university students using structural equation modelling. Consistent with our assumptions, the four types of reinterpretation related strongly to positive evaluation of the intervention, showing their relevance with regard to military intervention. Further, the assessed political attitudes influenced evaluation of the war while, contrary to predictions, belief in a just world did not. The causal status of the reinterpretations and the interplay of belief in a just world and political attitudes are discussed.
|Number of pages||12|
|Journal||Zeitschrift für Sozialpsychologie|
|Publication status||Published - 2002|