Position Paper 1: Ethical Dilemma
I think that Country B is morally right to occupy Territory along with Country A to unsure that the reconstruction occurs in a timely manner and that the people of Territory are given the right to self-determination. Country A went to war to change the political ideologies of the governing body of Territory for the people of Territory, which is good for the people of Territory. But it cost a lot of human lives and money, on the side, Territory is wealthy by its natural resources.
Every war cost enormous lives of innocent people and money so I think war is not a good idea to solve any problem. Country A should not go to war to solve the political ideologies problem of the governing body of Territory in the first place. All the countries in the world do not follow the same political ideologies. Every governing body of an independent country or territory has the right to follow its own political ideologies to lead the country. Any other country does not have the right to go in war with that country or territory to change its political ideologies. As it does not violate the international law but I think it violate the moral law.
Country A has violated the moral law by attacking the Territory for the people of the Territory. But natural resources can play a great role to attack and capture any country or territory by a powerful country. Territory is wealthy by its natural resources, mainly petroleum. And petroleum has a vast demand in the world. I think natural resources can manipulate the Country A to occupy the Territory.