The Politics of Humanity

277 Pages·2010·1.6 MB·English

The London School of Economics and Political
Science

The Politics of Humanity:
Humanitarianism and International
Political Theory

Henry Radice

A thesis submitted to the Department of
International Relations of the London School of
Economics for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy,
London, August 2010.
1
Declaration

I certify that the thesis I have presented for examination for the MPhil/PhD degree
of the London School of Economics and Political Science is solely my own work
other than where I have clearly indicated that it is the work of others (in which case
the extent of any work carried out jointly by me and any other person is clearly
identified in it).

The copyright of this thesis rests with the author. Quotation from it is permitted,
provided that full acknowledgement is made. This thesis may not be reproduced
without the prior written consent of the author.

I warrant that this authorization does not, to the best of my belief, infringe the
rights of any third party.

Signed: ……………………….................................... Date: …0…6…/1…2…/1…0………
2
Abstract

This thesis brings the concept of humanitarianism sharply into focus within the
discourse of international political theory. Existing literature examines
humanitarianism obliquely, via debates on military humanitarian intervention or
human rights, resulting in an impoverished account of a vital idea. Meanwhile, a
vibrant discussion among professional humanitarians has recently questioned the
nature of their endeavour, along lines that clearly fit the remit of international
political theory. Bringing together these two discussions in the course of its critical
analysis, the thesis argues that humanitarianism should be conceptualised as a
political context in which we articulate, negotiate and defend our understandings of
common humanity. Central to this politics are the ways in which we react to and
conceptualise human suffering, through humanitarian crises that are often "crises
of humanity". In sparking concern and mobilising responses to suffering, the
affective underpinnings of the humanitarian impulse create a complex and shifting
backdrop to extensions of solidarity and humanitarian action. At the heart of this
action is the idea of rescue, a crucial "presumptive occasion" of our moral life. But
an important part of humanitarian action consists in the efforts to institutionalise
the humanitarian impulse. In this sense human rights and projects of global justice
represent important crystallisations of humanitarian concern, yet neither can fully
capture the more contingent workings of the humanitarian impulse. What emerges
is an understanding of humanitarianism as a broad discussion, central to the
identity of contemporary liberal international political theory, but with a scope best
gleaned not from cosmopolitan accounts, but from a more fluid internationalist
tradition of thought. The thesis concludes that the importance of this theoretical
approach will be borne out by the complex and far-reaching practical challenges
that humanitarianism is set to confront over coming decades, not least the "crisis of
humanity" threatened by climate change.
3
Contents

List of Acronyms ....................................................................................................................... 6
Acknowledgements .................................................................................................................. 7
1. Introduction: Humanitarianism in Crisis and the Promise of International Political Theory8
I Locating Humanitarianism: Plausible Protagonists .......................................................... 11
II The Humanitarian Identity Crisis..................................................................................... 18
1. Humanitarian Principles ............................................................................................. 24
2. Humanitarianism and Politics .................................................................................... 35
3. The Scope of Humanitarianism .................................................................................. 38
III Why Is There No International Political Theory of Humanitarianism? .......................... 40
1. International Political Theory’s Core Concerns .......................................................... 43
2. The Neglect of Solidarity ............................................................................................ 47
3. A Brief Defence of a Liberal Humanitarian Framework ............................................. 49
IV Summary of the Argument ............................................................................................ 53
2. Humanitarianism and Human Suffering ............................................................................ 57
I From “Humanitarian Crisis” to “Crisis of Humanity” ....................................................... 59
II Cruelty and Innocence .................................................................................................... 69
III Dehumanisation and Inhumanity .................................................................................. 77
Conclusion .......................................................................................................................... 84
3. Mobilising the Humanitarian Impulse................................................................................ 86
I The Humanitarian Impulse as Emotional Capacity .......................................................... 88
II Knowing and Ignoring Suffering ...................................................................................... 97
III Stirring the Humanitarian Impulse ............................................................................... 104
IV Selectivity and Impartiality .......................................................................................... 114
Conclusion ........................................................................................................................ 121
4
4. Humanitarian Action as Rescue ....................................................................................... 123
I The Objects of Rescue: The Rescued ............................................................................. 125
II The Subjects of Rescue: The Rescuers .......................................................................... 132
III Motives, Intentions and Consequences ....................................................................... 137
IV The Problem of Causing Harm and the Means of Rescue ........................................... 143
Conclusion ........................................................................................................................ 150
5. The Pursuit of a Humanitarianism beyond Contingency: Accountability, Human Rights and
Global Justice ....................................................................................................................... 152
I Accountability and “Humanitarian Rights” .................................................................... 154
II Human Rights ................................................................................................................ 165
III Humanitarian Intervention: Contingency Laid Bare .................................................... 175
IV Global Justice and the Recognition of Injustice ........................................................... 182
Conclusion ........................................................................................................................ 190
6. Humanitarian Identity and Internationalist Solidarity: Conducting the “Politics of
Humanity” in a World of States ........................................................................................... 191
I Humanitarian Identity and Independence: Humanitarian Space and the State............ 193
II Taking States Seriously: Humanitarianism as Internationalist Solidarity ..................... 203
III Humanity Through Thick and Thin: Michael Walzer and the Internationalist Tradition
......................................................................................................................................... 215
Conclusion ........................................................................................................................ 226
7. Conclusion: The Struggle for Humanity ........................................................................... 227
I Failing Better? Humanity on a Human Scale .................................................................. 230
II Humanitarian Futures: The Challenge of Climate Change as a “Crisis of Humanity” ... 237
Conclusion ........................................................................................................................ 244
Bibliography ......................................................................................................................... 246

5
List of Acronyms

ALNAP Active Learning Network for Accountability and Performance in
Humanitarian Action
HFP Humanitarian Futures Programme
HPG Humanitarian Policy Group of the Overseas Development Institute
ICRC International Committee of the Red Cross
IDS Institute of Development Studies
IFRC International Federation of Red Cross and Red Crescent Societies
IGO Inter-Governmental Organisation
IHL International Humanitarian Law
IOM International Organization for Migration
IPCC Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change
MSF Médecins Sans Frontières
NGO Non-Governmental Organisation
NICE National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence
OCHA United Nations Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs
ODI Overseas Development Institute
R2P Responsibility to Protect
UDHR Universal Declaration of Human Rights
UNDP United Nations Development Programme
UNHCR United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees
UNRWA United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in
the Near East
6
Acknowledgements

I acknowledge with gratitude financial support from the International Relations
Department of the London School of Economics in the form of Research, R.J.
Vincent and Montague Burton scholarships. Seminars IR502 and IR509 were
instrumental in refining the argument. Particular thanks go to Kirsten Ainley,
Jasmine Gani, Kimberly Hutchings, David Karp, Vassilios Paipais and Meera
Sabaratnam who, at different stages of the process, provided me with invaluable
comments and insights. The year as editor of Millennium, alongside Serena Sharma
and Candice Moore, afforded me a privileged insight into the shaping of rigorous
academic writing. I have been lucky enough to be able to teach in my own subject
area for the past three years. I am grateful to the students of IR306, IR462 and
IR463. It is commonplace, but no less true, to say that I learned as much from them
as they from me. I am particularly grateful to Chris Brown, my supervisor, for the
opportunity to help develop and incorporate some of my own ideas into IR463 The
International Political Theory of Humanitarian Intervention. My overall debt of
gratitude to Chris is of a different order of magnitude altogether. Chris first sparked
my interest in international political theory as a postgraduate student, both through
his teaching and the exemplary clarity and wit of his writing. Over the last four
years, he has been an unfailingly encouraging and inspiring supervisor, as well as
providing wonderful company during fieldwork trips to such key humanitarian
institutions as the Village Vanguard. This thesis is dedicated to four loved ones who
have inspired me throughout its composition. My parents, Celia and Jonathan
Radice, as well as undertaking proofreading duties, have been a constant source of
love, support and encouragement for longer than I can remember. My dear friend,
Mark Ready, would no doubt have disagreed with many elements of the argument,
but I have no doubt that it is a better piece of work for the conversations I was lucky
enough to have with him on its subject matter. His loss is deeply felt by all who
knew and loved him. Finally, no words can do justice to the debt I owe to my wife,
Catherine Briddick. I am eternally grateful for her love and support.
7
1. Introduction: Humanitarianism in Crisis and the Promise of
International Political Theory

As part of a major rebranding exercise undertaken in early 2008, Oxfam, a leading
British non-governmental organisation (NGO) launched a striking new slogan: “Be
Humankind”.1 The exhortation neatly captures the three most significant meanings
of “humanity”: the “quality of being humane”, implying kindness and benevolence;
the “condition, quality, or fact of being human”; and “[human] beings collectively”.2
This thesis explores the ways in which we search for and contest the meaning of
humanity, in all three of the aforementioned senses of the term, through the idea
of humanitarianism. It does this by bringing together two debates that are
intimately involved, if not always self-consciously, in these negotiations.
Firstly, it examines the debates among professional humanitarians about the
nature of their calling, drawing on the dilemmas and paradoxes that characterise
contemporary humanitarian action. A decade into the twenty-first century, the
“humanitarian impulse” has been institutionalised at international level to an
unprecedented degree, across inter-governmental organisations (IGOs), non-
governmental organisations, complex bodies of International Humanitarian Law
(IHL) and International Human Rights Law. Yet many consider that humanitarianism
is in the throes of a multifaceted crisis of identity. This sense of crisis is most
strongly felt among those who now pass whole careers in its employ and can
plausibly be termed professional humanitarians. Their unease feeds on a double
sense of doubt. They doubt whether, for all the prominence of humanitarianism
and human rights within contemporary political discourse, the contemporary world

1 Darren Davidson, "Oxfam Urges Consumers to 'Be Humankind'", brandrepublic.com (18
April 2008). Available at http://www.brandrepublic.com/News/803123/Oxfam-urges-
consumers-be-humankind/; accessed on 05 July 2010. Oxfam, Be Humankind, TV advert
(2008). Available at
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eQK6ODxDfDY&feature=player_embedded; accessed
on 05 July 2010.
2 Oxford English Dictionary, "Humanity", Oxford English Dictionary Online (Draft Revision
June 2010). Available at http://dictionary.oed.com; accessed on 05 July 2010.
8
is in any meaningful sense a more humane place to be than that which preceded it.
They also doubt, quite simply, whether all their practical endeavours are doing
much good. They are finding it harder and harder to answer a simple question: what
is humanitarianism?
Secondly, in response to this important question, it juxtaposes these
debates with the rich discussions in contemporary international political theory on
the appropriate content and scope of human solidarity. Charles Beitz, a central
figure in the resurgence of international political theory, once wrote that: “We need
a political theory of human rights because the international practice of human
rights is problematic”.3 In this thesis, I want to make a similar case for an
international political theory account of humanitarianism: we need one because the
international practice of humanitarianism is problematic, and because, I argue, the
paradoxes and possibilities of humanitarianism really come into focus when we look
at them through the lens of international political theory. Beyond the discussions
taking place in the context of professional humanitarian practice, I argue that we
need to train this lens both on individual acts of solidarity or rescue, and on wider
discussions about the political traction of ideas of a common humanity. The task of
international political theory here is to explore humanitarianism “as a personal
characteristic, as a relation between individuals, and as a political phenomenon”, to

3 Charles R. Beitz, "Human Rights and the Law of Peoples", in The Ethics of Assistance:
Morality and the Distant Needy, ed. Deen K. Chatterjee (Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press, 2004), 193. Italics in original. In a recent work on human rights, Beitz recognises the
limitations, which are equally important to the present study of humanitarianism, of an
ambition to form a single unified theory of human rights: “the aspirations of a theory of
human rights should be in one way modest. To think of human rights as I have suggested is
to accept that we should understand their nature and requirements as responses to
contingent historical circumstances. So it is probably a mistake to expect to discover a basis
for human rights in one or a few clear moral ideas, to formulate a canonical list of rights, or
to devise a single authoritative means for bringing them to bear on practical choices. What
a theory of human rights might rather hope to accomplish is to clarify the uses to which
they may be put in the discourse of global political life and to identify and give structure to
the considerations it would be appropriate to take into account, in light of these uses, in
deliberating about their content and application. It would seek to interpret the normative
discipline implicit in the practice. Such a theory would not, so to speak, stand outside the
practice; it would be continuous with it.” Charles R. Beitz, The Idea of Human Rights
(Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009), 212.
9
borrow Judith Shklar’s account of how political theory should explore such a
concept.4
The thesis argues that such humanitarian debates are really discussions
about how best to honour our human identity, one among our many different
identities, through the elaboration of human solidarity, and follows Kwame Anthony
Appiah in observing that:

if we’re going to deal with identity, it’s reasonable to ask how large a part
these identities should play in our political lives, whether we take politics in
the narrow sense of our dealings with the state, or, more broadly, as our
dealings, in social life, with one another.5

The thesis thus examines the “politics of humanity” in this broadest sense of the
term, without neglecting the particular problems that arise from an international
political context still largely structured by states.
In this introductory chapter, I first situate my starting point in the
experiences and dilemmas of professional humanitarians, against other plausible
alternatives, as the most productive way to make sense of the concept of
humanitarianism. I then set out the reasons why professional humanitarianism is
currently understood as in crisis, and set out the contours of this crisis according to
ongoing discussions about its principles, politics and scope. I then question why
contemporary international political theory has yet fully to engage with this vital set
of issues, before setting out its potential to bring home the importance of a better
understanding of the “politics of humanity”.

4 In her case the particular concept at stake was injustice, which will be examined in
Chapter 5. Judith N. Shklar, The Faces of Injustice (London: Yale University Press, 1990), 50.
5 Kwame Anthony Appiah, "The Politics of Identity", Daedalus 135, no. 4 (2006): 17. Appiah
usefully elaborates as follows: “I count seven different ways in which I’ve said that you
might speak of ‘identity politics.’ (1) There are political conflicts about who’s in and who’s
out. (2) Politicians can mobilize identities. (3) States can treat people of distinct identities
differently. (4) People can pursue a politics of recognition. (5) There can be a social
micropolitics enforcing norms of identification. (6) There are inherently political identities
like party identifications. And (7) social groups can mobilize to respond collectively to all of
the above.” Appiah, "The Politics of Identity": 22. For two particularly elegant accounts of
the politics of identity, see Amin Maalouf, Les Identités Meurtrières (Paris: Grasset, 1998).
Amartya Sen, Identity and Violence: The Illusion of Destiny (London: W.W. Norton &
Company, 2006).
10