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
I Was Fired From Emerson College For Speaking Out About Palestine, But I Refuse To Be Silent
Take Action Now Anna Feder is suing Emerson College for firing her over her Palestine activism. She says she will never stop advocating for a free…
The Path To Medicare for All
Take Action Now How can the U.S. take steps to join the rest of the developed world in adopting single-payer health care?By Dean Baker,…
(Not Quite) Tinder For New Activists: “Why Don’t We Already Have This?”
Take Action Now Many people are looking for a way to do something. They have heard that we the people — all of us — may be the last functioning…
What Could The Pentagon’s Record $1 Trillion Budget Pay For Instead?
Take Action Now President Trump is seeking a record $1 trillion budget for the Pentagon in 2026. What else could we do with that much money?By…