During the Iraq War, some US soldiers refused (re)deployment. While liberal states appear to protect individuals’ right not to fight against their moral convictions by allowing the right to conscientious objection, those whose objections do not align with the regulations have to break the law in order to follow their convictions. This article explores how the legitimation of liberal war is challenged when we listen to the stories such refusers tell. Focusing on the United States, it briefly sets out the normative context such soldiers faced, highlighting the distinction between permissible conscientious objectors and contemptible deserters. Drawing on Judith Butler, it then focuses on two refusers by reading their own accounts of themselves in their memoirs. Despite not being eligible under the regulations, both invoke their conscience to make their refusal intelligible. By listening to their detailed accounts, the article traces the production and disruption of their subjectivities in relation to the prevailing moral order. Although invoking conscience appears to provide the chance to embrace an authentic self in a bid to resist the problematic moral order, subjectivity remains fractured due to relationality. Put differently, the sovereign subjectivity required by liberal war is simultaneously undermined by it.

中文翻译：

---

军事拒绝者和良心的召唤：关系主体性和自由战争的合法性

在伊拉克战争期间，一些美国士兵拒绝（重新）部署。虽然自由主义国家似乎通过允许出于良心反对的权利来保护个人不与他们的道德信念作斗争的权利，但那些反对与法规不符的人必须违反法律才能遵循他们的信念。本文探讨了当我们聆听这些拒绝者讲述的故事时，自由战争的合法性如何受到挑战。它以美国为重点，简要阐述了这些士兵所面临的规范背景，突出了允许的良心拒服兵役者和可鄙的逃兵之间的区别。借鉴朱迪思·巴特勒，然后通过阅读他们在回忆录中对自己的描述，重点关注两个拒绝者。尽管不符合规定，两人都唤起他们的良心，使他们的拒绝变得可以理解。通过聆听他们的详细叙述，文章追溯了他们的主观性与盛行的道德秩序相关的产生和破坏。尽管援引良心似乎提供了拥抱真实自我以抵制有问题的道德秩序的机会，但由于关系性，主体性仍然断裂。换句话说，自由战争所要求的主权主体性同时被它所破坏。由于相关性，主体性仍然支离破碎。换句话说，自由战争所要求的主权主体性同时被它所破坏。由于相关性，主体性仍然支离破碎。换句话说，自由战争所要求的主权主体性同时被它所破坏。