Civility, Barbarism and the Evolution of International Humanitarian Law Who do the Laws of War Protect?
Book contents
- Civility, Barbarism, and the Evolution of International Humanitarian Law
- Civility, Barbarism, and the Evolution of International Humanitarian Law
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Contributors
- Preface and Acknowledgements
- Abbreviations
- 1 Introduction
- 2 Sieges and the Laws of War in Europe’s Long Eighteenth Century
- 3 All’s Fair in Love and War or the Limits of the Limitations
- 4 Cultivating Humanitarianism
- 5 Limits to the Scope of Humanity as a Constraint on the Conduct of War
- 6 The State, Civility, and International Humanitarian Law
- 7 Operationalising Distinction in South Sudan
- 8 Private Military and Security Companies and International Humanitarian Law
- 9 Protecting Warfighters from Superfluous Injury and Unnecessary Suffering
- 10 Blurring the Lines
- 11 A Step Back to Take a Step Forward
- Index
- References
4 - Cultivating Humanitarianism
Moral Sentiment and International Humanitarian Law in the Civilising Process
Published online by Cambridge University Press: 11 January 2024
Book contents
- Civility, Barbarism, and the Evolution of International Humanitarian Law
- Civility, Barbarism, and the Evolution of International Humanitarian Law
- Copyright page
- Contents
- Contributors
- Preface and Acknowledgements
- Abbreviations
- 1 Introduction
- 2 Sieges and the Laws of War in Europe’s Long Eighteenth Century
- 3 All’s Fair in Love and War or the Limits of the Limitations
- 4 Cultivating Humanitarianism
- 5 Limits to the Scope of Humanity as a Constraint on the Conduct of War
- 6 The State, Civility, and International Humanitarian Law
- 7 Operationalising Distinction in South Sudan
- 8 Private Military and Security Companies and International Humanitarian Law
- 9 Protecting Warfighters from Superfluous Injury and Unnecessary Suffering
- 10 Blurring the Lines
- 11 A Step Back to Take a Step Forward
- Index
- References
Summary
Until quite recently, international relations theory neglected the role of emotions. This chapter surveys the rehabilitation of emotions and moral sentiment in political and international relations theory with a view to examining the cultivation of sympathy as a normative and historical condition of international humanitarian law as a ‘civilising process’. The chapter argues that, as part of a broader ‘civilising process’ to alleviate unnecessary human suffering, moral sentiment has been an indispensable, if ambivalent, factor in the historical pursuit of humanitarian action. The chapter argues that the modern codification of international humanitarian law is predicated on the cultivation of moral sentiments such as sympathy and compassion being extended to those injured or killed on the battlefields.
Keywords
- Type
- Chapter
- Information
- Civility, Barbarism and the Evolution of International Humanitarian LawWho do the Laws of War Protect?, pp. 61 - 84Publisher: Cambridge University PressPrint publication year: 2024
References
Alexander, A. (2015). A short history of international humanitarian law. European Journal of International Law 26(1), 109–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barnett, M. (2011). Empire of Humanity: A History of Humanitarianism, Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Bass, G. J. (2008). Freedom’s Battle: The Origins of Humanitarian Intervention, New York: Alfred A. Knopf.Google Scholar
Best, G. (1983). Humanity in Warfare: The Modern History of the International Law of Armed Conflict, New York: Columbia University Press.Google Scholar
Bleiker, R., and Hutchison, E. (2008). Fear no more: emotions and world politics. Review of International Studies 30(3), 503–39.Google Scholar
Boissier, P. (1985). History of the International Committee of the Red Cross: From Solferino to Tsushima, Geneva: Henry Dunant Institute.Google Scholar
Boyd, R. (2013). Adam Smith on civility and civil society. In Berry, C. J., Paganelli, M. P., and Smith, C. (eds.), The Oxford Handbook of Adam Smith, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Calhoun, C. (2008). The imperative to reduce suffering: charity, progress, and emergencies in the field of humanitarian action. In Barnett, M. and Weiss, T. G. (eds.), Humanitarianism in Question: Politics, Power, Ethics, Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
Crawford, E. (2018). The enduring legacy of the St Petersburg Declaration: distinction, military necessity, and the prohibition of causing unnecessary suffering and superfluous injury in IHL. Journal of the History of International Law 20(4), 544–66.Google Scholar
Crawford, N. (2000). The passion of world politics: propositions on emotions and emotional relationships. International Security 24(4), 116–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crawford, N. (2014). Institutionalizing passion in world politics: fear and empathy. International Theory 6(3), 535–57.Google Scholar
Devetak, R. (2005). The gothic scene of international relations: ghosts, monsters, terror and the sublime after September 11. Review of International Studies 31(4), 621–44.Google Scholar
Devetak, R. (2011). The moralization of international politics: humanitarian intervention and its critics. Quaderni di Relazioni Internazionali 14(May), 70–85.Google Scholar
Dunant, H. (1959). A Memory of Solferino, Geneva: International Committee of the Red Cross.Google Scholar
Elias, N. (1994). The Civilizing Process: The History of Manners and State Formation and Civilization, trans. Jephcott, Edmund, Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Erskine, T. (2008). Embedded Cosmopolitanism: Duties to Strangers and Enemies in a World of ‘Dislocated Communities’, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Fassin, D. (2010). Heart of humaneness: the moral economy of humanitarian intervention. In Fassin, D. and Pandolfi, M. (eds.), Contemporary States of Emergency: The Politics of Military and Humanitarian Interventions, New York: Zone Books.Google Scholar
Fassin, D. (2012). Humanitarian Reason: A Moral History of the Present, trans. Gomme, Rachel, Berkeley: University of California.Google Scholar
Gill, R. (2007). The ‘new humanitarian’ ethos in Britain: 1870–1918. Quatrième journée guerre et médecines, 12 May, 1–9.Google Scholar
Gong, G. (1984). The Standard of ‘Civilization’ in International Society, Oxford: Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
de Grouchy, S. (2019). Sophie de Grouchy’s Letters on Sympathy: A Critical Engagement with Adam Smith’s The Theory of Moral Sentiments, trans. Bergès, Sandrine, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Haakonssen, K. (2002). Introduction. In Adam Smith, The Theory of Moral Sentiments, ed. Haakonssen, Knud, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hume, D. (2007). A Treatise of Human Nature: A Critical Edition, ed. Norton, David Fate, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Hutchinson, J. F. (1989). Rethinking the origins of the Red Cross. Bulletin of the History of Medicine 63, 557–78.Google ScholarPubMed
Hutchison, E. (2016). Affective Communities in World Politics: Collective Emotions after Trauma, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hutchison, E., and Bleiker, R. (2014). Theorizing emotions in world politics. International Theory 6(3), 491–514.Google Scholar
International Committee for the Relief of the Wounded (1863). Minutes of the Meeting of the Sub-Committee of the Society for the Relief of Combatants Wounded in Time of War, held on 17 Feb 1863. International Review of the Red Cross (23), 65–67.Google Scholar
Jeffery, R. (2014). Reason and Emotions in International Ethics, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
af Jochnick, C., and Normand, R. (1994). The legitimation of violence: a critical history of the laws of war. Harvard International Law Journal 35(1), 49–95.Google Scholar
Keal, P. (2003). European Conquest and the Rights of Indigenous Peoples: The Moral Backwardness of International Society, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Keenan, T. (2002). Publicity and indifference (Sarajevo on television). PMLA 117(1), 104–16.Google Scholar
Kennedy, D. (2004). The Dark Sides of Virtue: Reassessing International Humanitarianism, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Killingsworth, M. (2016). From St Petersburg to Rome: understanding the evolution of the modern laws of war. Australian Journal of Politics and History 62(1), 100–15.Google Scholar
Kinsella, H. (2011). The Image before the Weapon: A Critical History of the Distinction between Combatant and Civilian, Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Koselleck, R. (1985). Futures Past: On the Semantics of Historical Time, trans. Tribe, Keith, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Laqueur, T. (1989). Bodies, details, and humanitarian narrative. In Hunt, Lynn (ed.), The New Cultural History, Berkeley: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Lieber, F. (1863). Instructions for the Government of Armies of the United States, in the Field, New York: van Nostrand.Google Scholar
Linklater, A. (2007). Distant suffering and cosmopolitan obligations. International Politics 44(1), 19–36.Google Scholar
Linklater, A. (2011). The Problem of Harm in World Politics: Theoretical Investigations, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Linklater, A. (2016). Violence and Civilization in the Western States-Systems, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Mercer, J. (2005). Rationality and psychology in international politics. International Organization 59, 77–106.Google Scholar
Mercer, J. (2014). Feeling like a state: social emotion and identity. International Theory 6(3), 515–35.Google Scholar
Mill, J. S. (1977). Civilization. In Essays on Politics and Society, ed. Robson, J. M., Toronto: University of Toronto Press and Routledge Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
Muldoon, P. (2008). The moral legitimacy of anger. European Journal of Social Theory 11(3), 299–314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Muldoon, P. (2014). Philoctetes and the politics of rescue. In Ure, Michael and Frost, Mervyn (eds.), The Politics of Compassion. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Nussbaum, M. C. (2001). Upheavals of Thought: The Intelligence of Emotions, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Phillips, M. S. (2008). On the advantage and disadvantage of sentimental history for life. History Workshop Journal 65, 49–64.Google Scholar
Power, S. (2002). ‘A Problem from Hell’: America and the Age of Genocide, London: Flamingo.Google Scholar
Rieff, D. (1995). Slaughterhouse: Bosnia and the Failure of the West, London: Vintage.Google Scholar
Robin, C. (2004). Fear: The History of a Political Idea, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Smith, A. (2002). The Theory of Moral Sentiments, ed. Haakonssen, Knud, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Sophocles, (2015). Philoctetes. In Oedipus the King and Other Tragedies, trans. Taplin, Oliver, Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Ure, M., and Frost, M. (2014). Introduction. In Ure, M. and Frost, M. (eds.), The Politics of Compassion, London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Wight, M. (1991). Theory of Mankind: ‘Barbarians’. In Wight, G. and Porter, B. (eds.), International Theory: The Three Traditions, Leicester: Leicester University Press.Google Scholar