Återgärdbarhet

Återgärdbarhet is a Swedish term that denotes the potential or capacity for retaliation in response to wrongdoing. The word combines återgärd (retaliation) with the suffix -bar, meaning able to be. In use, it appears in ethical, legal, and political theory discussions as a way to analyze when retaliation is possible or justifiable.

In moral philosophy and legal theory, återgärdbarhet concerns whether retaliatory action is morally and practically justifiable. A central question is whether retaliation might escalate violence or harm innocent parties. This leads to debates about when retaliation should be permitted or condemned, and when restorative or compensatory responses are more appropriate. The concept is often used to examine the legitimacy of self-help or vigilante justice and the constraints on state punishment.

In international security and politics, återgärdbarhet relates to the credibility of retaliation threats and the stability of deterrence. If a state can credibly threaten or deliver proportionate retaliation after an attack, its deterrent effect may be stronger. Conversely, threats that are uncertain or implausible tend to weaken deterrence and can invite aggression.

Practically, the concept is contested. Some scholars argue that retaliation can fuel cycles of violence and harm the innocent, which supports restorative justice and compensation as alternatives. Others maintain that some level of retaliation is necessary to protect victims’ rights and social order. The term remains primarily used in academic discussions rather than as a fixed legal category in Swedish criminal procedure.