Full text at: http://www.spectrezine.org/reviews/Chandler.htm
--- In Ova adresa el. pošte je zaštićena od spambotova. Omogućite JavaScript da biste je videli., Gennaro ha scritto:
(...)
Review 'From Kosovo to Kabul...' by Sven Engel
(The reviewer, Sven Engel, is an adviser to the United Left Group
(GUE-NGL) at the European Parliament, specialising in civil liberties,
justice and home affairs)
David Chandler,
"From Kosovo to Kabul. Human Rights and International Intervention",
(London Pluto Press 2002)
In the 1990s the world order has undergone dramatic changes. A new
"ethical foreign policy" based on the challenge of the human rights
discourse to the existing framework of international relations has led
to a proliferation of Western military interventions from Iraq to
Bosnia, to Kosovo and back to Iraq, all of them in the name of "human
rights and democracy". This new order is increasingly replacing the
post-World War Two order of the United Nations and has effectively
undermined the principles of sovereignty and formal equality of nation
states. The United Nations order, as imperfect as it might have been,
nevertheless replaced the older Westphalian concept of international
relations in which 'might became right', i.e. in which the Great
Powers were free to intervene in weaker states or colonial
territories, since sovereignty was based on power alone. The League of
Nations began the process of legally restricting the sovereignty of
the Great Powers, but only the UN system added the principle of
non-interventionism and full sovereign equality and put the goal of
securing peace at the core of its Charter.
Chandler's excellent book exposes the way in which human rights
activists and NGOs have established the ideological framework of
contemporary Western militarism, the 'human rights intervention', and
describes the development of a new era of armed intervention for
"ethical" ends (35).
The apologists for this new humanitarian interventionism both from the
right and the left simply assume that the Great Powers who make up the
"coalitions of the willing" will behave well and intervene on behalf
of human rights and justice rather than in a strictly self-interested
way. That this human rights rationale for interventionism is a genuine
menace to both human rights and democracy is convincingly demonstrated
in Chandler's book. The human rights activists have - mostly willingly
- paved the way for NATO-forces in all corners of the world, and
helped to achieve a situation in which humanitarian aid and cruise
missiles are simultaneously dropped on Afghanistan.
Chandler gives no detailed legal discussion, since the breaches of
international law are clear. In his view, "the extension of
'international justice' is, in fact, the abolition of international
law." (p.137) Neither is he adding to the more traditional critique
that reveals the double standards of human rights interventionism, or
the anti-imperialist type of ideology-critique which holds human
rights interventions as a cynical cover-up for the traditional
realpolitik of major powers, although he covers both in a brief
chapter. Instead, Chandler wants to expose the elitist assumptions
behind the human rights movement, its attack on the principles of
representative democracy and negotiated settlements. In his view,
human rights activists have, contrary to their own demands,
dis-empowered the subjects in conflict zones by defining them strictly
as passive victims, helplessly suffering from the aggressions of
undemocratic and unaccountable rulers. As Hannah Arendt noted, this
relationship of external assistance for victims is the opposite of a
right: it is a charitable act.
Ever since the Biafra war, human rights activists like Bernard
Kouchner or NGOs like Human Rights Watch, Médecins Sans Frontières and
others have abandoned the principles of more traditional
humanitarianism as represented by the ICRC which was based on strict
impartiality and neutrality, and called for more invasive, committed,
and positioned humanitarian action. By uniquely focussing on violence
and torture, genocide and mass rape, the human rights discourse
managed to abstract from a wider political context and to establish
ethical principles in the foreign policies of leading Western
governments. This gave new legitimacy to their actions abroad and to
their standing in the domestic sphere. After all, who could be opposed
to the British government helping Kosovan refugees or "liberating "
the Iraqi people? Thus, "the attention to ethical foreign policy has
been an important resource of authority and credibility for Western
political leaders." (63).
This new human rights principle, derived from the needs of the human
rights victim, imposes a duty on outside bodies to act if the nation
state fails, or is unable, to guarantee human rights. However, the
duty to intervene can only ever fall on the most powerful states,
whatever the utopian rhetoric of the 'cosmopolitan civil society'
theorists. (133). Is this a shift back to the old Westphalian order of
absolute sovereignty for the absolutely powerful? In any case, the
human rights principle has pushed aside the efforts of UN Blue Helmet
operations which sought to reach consensus among conflicting parties,
to establish a cease fire achieved by political negotiations and to
monitor a post-conflict process of democratisation and decision-making
which tried to integrate all relevant factions. The new framework
calls for external intervention in and regulation of conflicts
following the advice of human rights elites who claim to "represent"
the victims of human rights abuses against their own governments - be
they elected or not.
full: http://www.spectrezine.org/reviews/Chandler.htm
--
The Marxism list: www.marxmail.org
--- Fine messaggio inoltrato ---
Full text at: http://www.spectrezine.org/reviews/Chandler.htm
--- In Ova adresa el. pošte je zaštićena od spambotova. Omogućite JavaScript da biste je videli., Gennaro ha scritto:
(...)
Review 'From Kosovo to Kabul...' by Sven Engel
(The reviewer, Sven Engel, is an adviser to the United Left Group
(GUE-NGL) at the European Parliament, specialising in civil liberties,
justice and home affairs)
David Chandler,
"From Kosovo to Kabul. Human Rights and International Intervention",
(London Pluto Press 2002)
In the 1990s the world order has undergone dramatic changes. A new
"ethical foreign policy" based on the challenge of the human rights
discourse to the existing framework of international relations has led
to a proliferation of Western military interventions from Iraq to
Bosnia, to Kosovo and back to Iraq, all of them in the name of "human
rights and democracy". This new order is increasingly replacing the
post-World War Two order of the United Nations and has effectively
undermined the principles of sovereignty and formal equality of nation
states. The United Nations order, as imperfect as it might have been,
nevertheless replaced the older Westphalian concept of international
relations in which 'might became right', i.e. in which the Great
Powers were free to intervene in weaker states or colonial
territories, since sovereignty was based on power alone. The League of
Nations began the process of legally restricting the sovereignty of
the Great Powers, but only the UN system added the principle of
non-interventionism and full sovereign equality and put the goal of
securing peace at the core of its Charter.
Chandler's excellent book exposes the way in which human rights
activists and NGOs have established the ideological framework of
contemporary Western militarism, the 'human rights intervention', and
describes the development of a new era of armed intervention for
"ethical" ends (35).
The apologists for this new humanitarian interventionism both from the
right and the left simply assume that the Great Powers who make up the
"coalitions of the willing" will behave well and intervene on behalf
of human rights and justice rather than in a strictly self-interested
way. That this human rights rationale for interventionism is a genuine
menace to both human rights and democracy is convincingly demonstrated
in Chandler's book. The human rights activists have - mostly willingly
- paved the way for NATO-forces in all corners of the world, and
helped to achieve a situation in which humanitarian aid and cruise
missiles are simultaneously dropped on Afghanistan.
Chandler gives no detailed legal discussion, since the breaches of
international law are clear. In his view, "the extension of
'international justice' is, in fact, the abolition of international
law." (p.137) Neither is he adding to the more traditional critique
that reveals the double standards of human rights interventionism, or
the anti-imperialist type of ideology-critique which holds human
rights interventions as a cynical cover-up for the traditional
realpolitik of major powers, although he covers both in a brief
chapter. Instead, Chandler wants to expose the elitist assumptions
behind the human rights movement, its attack on the principles of
representative democracy and negotiated settlements. In his view,
human rights activists have, contrary to their own demands,
dis-empowered the subjects in conflict zones by defining them strictly
as passive victims, helplessly suffering from the aggressions of
undemocratic and unaccountable rulers. As Hannah Arendt noted, this
relationship of external assistance for victims is the opposite of a
right: it is a charitable act.
Ever since the Biafra war, human rights activists like Bernard
Kouchner or NGOs like Human Rights Watch, Médecins Sans Frontières and
others have abandoned the principles of more traditional
humanitarianism as represented by the ICRC which was based on strict
impartiality and neutrality, and called for more invasive, committed,
and positioned humanitarian action. By uniquely focussing on violence
and torture, genocide and mass rape, the human rights discourse
managed to abstract from a wider political context and to establish
ethical principles in the foreign policies of leading Western
governments. This gave new legitimacy to their actions abroad and to
their standing in the domestic sphere. After all, who could be opposed
to the British government helping Kosovan refugees or "liberating "
the Iraqi people? Thus, "the attention to ethical foreign policy has
been an important resource of authority and credibility for Western
political leaders." (63).
This new human rights principle, derived from the needs of the human
rights victim, imposes a duty on outside bodies to act if the nation
state fails, or is unable, to guarantee human rights. However, the
duty to intervene can only ever fall on the most powerful states,
whatever the utopian rhetoric of the 'cosmopolitan civil society'
theorists. (133). Is this a shift back to the old Westphalian order of
absolute sovereignty for the absolutely powerful? In any case, the
human rights principle has pushed aside the efforts of UN Blue Helmet
operations which sought to reach consensus among conflicting parties,
to establish a cease fire achieved by political negotiations and to
monitor a post-conflict process of democratisation and decision-making
which tried to integrate all relevant factions. The new framework
calls for external intervention in and regulation of conflicts
following the advice of human rights elites who claim to "represent"
the victims of human rights abuses against their own governments - be
they elected or not.
full: http://www.spectrezine.org/reviews/Chandler.htm
--
The Marxism list: www.marxmail.org
--- Fine messaggio inoltrato ---
Full text at: http://www.spectrezine.org/reviews/Chandler.htm