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
Feeding The Warfare State
Take Action Now We Lose, the Weapons Makers WinBy William D. Hartung, Tom Dispatch The Senate is on the verge of passing the distinctly misnamed…
The Rage Of Billionaires And The Frenzy To Stop Zohran Mamdani From Becoming New York’s Mayor
Take Action Now The constellation of forces now regrouping with a vengeance includes titans of Wall Street, enormous real estate interests,…
It’s Not Just The Cities. Extreme Heat Is A Growing Threat To Rural America.
Take Action Now The urban heat island sits in a rural heat ocean.By Umair Irfan, Vox Summer has officially begun with a blast of scorching…
Mamdani’s Massive Victory Should Show Democrats Where The Party’s Future Lies
Take Action Now NYC mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani has thrown the drowning Democratic Party a life vest. Will its leaders use it?By Sam…