Humanitarian militarism and the production of humanity

Abstract

The limits and consequences of humanitarian military operations continue to be major issues in Western public debates on global security, democracy and human rights. This article focuses on the intersection of war and humanitarianism, situating the study of humanitarian militarism within a European context in which a reinvigorated proliferation of the military ethos coexists with ongoing transformations in European military culture and a resurgence of nation‐state ideologies. Building on a reflection of the historical consolidation of humanitarian militarism and interviews conducted with soldiers, the paper explores the politics of humanity produced by humanitarian militarism.

Humanitarianism, Securitization and Humanitarian Communication

“…After having outlined the notion of humanitarianism and the concept of securitization -as we have seen intertwined with that of human security -it is now possible to look at the interconnections of these two dimensions. Despite humanitarianism' aspirations for neutral, impartial and independent action, 6 a large swathe of scholarship has already shown the interplay of humanitarianism with military action and security (De Lauri 2018;Donini et al 2004Donini et al , 2008Duffield 2001;Macrae 2002;Tirman 2003). This growing literature has been mainly concerned with the increasingly blurred lines between humanitarian operations and military and security interventions, and their crucial political implications.…”

Humanitarian Borderwork? : An Analysis of Frontex’s Discourses and Practices

“…The traditional form of humanitarianism is commonly traced back to the founding of the Red Cross in the 1850s by Henry Dunant, in response to the treatment of wounded in war (Redfield andBornstein 2011, Skinner andLester 2012) -although some go as far back as to the antislavery movement in the 1700s, and efforts of European administrators and missionaries to care for its colonial populations, among others (ibid.). Nevertheless, there is a growing awareness within anthropology and other disciplines that the concept of humanitarianism is changing, shifting away from the traditional understanding of humanitarianism as neutral, impartial, depoliticized and categorically against militarized forms of violence, into a fragmented, hybrid form -a so-called 'new humanitarianism', where the mentality seems to be 'anything goes' (Nascimento 2015, De Lauri 2018.…”

“…This conflation of militarism and humanitarianism has further been institutionalized by the UN in the controversial 'Responsibility to Protect' (R2P) doctrine -first used in Libya in 2011 -which has been accused of condoning military intervention in the name of humanitarianism. This conceptual blurring has been referred to by scholars as 'armed love' (Ticktin 2011), 'humanitarian militarism', 'compassionate militarism', 'humanitarian war', or even 'humanitarian terrorism' (De Lauri 2018). Capturing the inherent contradictions of this merging, De Lauri (2018:3) highlights 'humanitarian militarism's capability to offer, at the same time, violence and promise, cruelty and caregiving'.…”

“…Given practical and strategical overlap in goals and operations on the ground, militarism and humanitarianism have become inextricably linked (Gilman 2012in De Lauri 2018.…”

“…state security) are mutually attainable. This 'humanitarian-security' (Andersson 2017, De Lauri 2018 or 'safety/security' (Williams 2016) nexus casts increased border control as not the cause of, but the remedy to, migrants' vulnerability and death. 'Humanitarian borderwork' further implies a convergence between two seemingly distinct concepts: 'humanitarianism' and 'borderwork' (Walters 2011).…”