Humanitarian intervention is how those profiting from war sell it to the American people. Don’t believe it ever again.
By Achin Vanaik, Jacobin
During the late 1990s and the early 2000s, the doctrine of “humanitarian intervention” came to the fore as a justification for US-led military adventures in the Balkans and the Middle East. A number of recent events have revived our memory of those debates, from the ignominious US withdrawal from Afghanistan, just as the twentieth anniversary of the 9/11 attacks was approaching, to the deaths of leading Bush administration officials such as Donald Rumsfeld and Colin Powell.

For many people, the disastrous outcomes in Iraq and Afghanistan will be enough to discredit the idea of humanitarian intervention. But past experience suggests that the justification it offers for military action is too useful to be discarded by the United States and its allies. Such arguments may well be used in support for future wars. We still need to address and refute the case for “humanitarian” warfare on its own terms.
Recent Posts
The Quiet Way Trump Has Made Life Easier For Polluters
March 12, 2026
Take Action Now It’s not just about environmental rollbacks: Trump and Lee Zeldin have presided over a striking decline in the EPA enforcing existing…
Coalition Demands Schumer, Jeffries Step Down Over Failure to Fight ‘War-Crazed’ Trump
March 12, 2026
Take Action Now “Schumer and Jeffries have shown that they cannot be trusted to prevent more wars, more threats of wars, or the transfer of another…
Coalition of Antiwar Groups Launches National Campaign Calling for Jeffries and Schumer to Step Aside from Leadership
March 11, 2026
Take Action Now “Schumer and Jeffries have failed their party and country through wobbly leadership when firmness and clarity are needed in opposing…
The Bases Basis for the Iran War
March 11, 2026
Take Action Now The economic impact of this war — through oil, tourism, and otherwise — is likely to continue to rub Gulf nations’ faces in the…




