Five shades of grey: variants of ‘political’ humanitarianism

Humanitarianism is a contested concept. Should humanitarian action seek to address only the symptoms of crises, or also their causes? Can humanitarian agencies best achieve their goals through a commitment to neutrality, or should they take a self-consciously political approach? This paper argues th...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autor: Bradley, Miriam
Tipo de recurso: artículo
Estado:Versión aceptada para publicación
Fecha de publicación:2022
País:España
Institución:Universitat Pompeu Fabra
Repositorio:Repositorio Digital de la UPF
OAI Identifier:oai:repositori.upf.edu:10230/60117
Acceso en línea:http://hdl.handle.net/10230/60117
http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/disa.12512
Access Level:acceso abierto
Palabra clave:Classical humanitarianism
New humanitarianism
ICRC
Neutrality
Humanitarian principles
Political humanitarianism
Consequentialism
Deontology
Speaking out
State sovereignty
Descripción
Sumario:Humanitarianism is a contested concept. Should humanitarian action seek to address only the symptoms of crises, or also their causes? Can humanitarian agencies best achieve their goals through a commitment to neutrality, or should they take a self-consciously political approach? This paper argues that debates about the desirability of more ambitious approaches to humanitarianism have been clouded by a lack of conceptual clarity. Showing that the perspective of the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) is not as apolitical as is often presented, and that so-called ‘political humanitarianism’ conflates four conceptually distinct ways of being political, the paper suggests that a black and white characterisation of approaches to humanitarianism as either political or apolitical is more accurately rendered as (at least) five shades of grey. Distinguishing the variants of ‘political’ humanitarianism matters, and the paper highlights how their conflation has marred normative debates on the desirability of different approaches.