Humanitarian Practices of Arms Control and Disarmament

Abstract

This article dwells briefly on the positivist and critical security studies approaches to classifying practices of humanitarianism, arms control, and disarmament as old and new. It then expands on this classification by focusing on three specific constitutive practices of identity, expertise and security to demonstrate alignments of power forged between state and non-state actors as they navigate possibilities of creating a humanitarian space in the field of arms control and disarmament to reconceptualize practices of arms control and disarmament as a problem of human security. The article argues that these efforts cannot produce a paradigm shift capable of transforming practices of arms control and disarmament unless they are accompanied by a greater degree of reflexivity among the humanitarian actors on their practices as they strive to meet the conditions of acceptance established by sovereign nation-states as the dominant actors in the field of arms control and disarmament.

Notes

Fiona Fox, ‘New Humanitarianism: Does it Provide a Moral Banner for the 21st Century’, Disasters, Vol. 25, No. 4 (2001), pp.275–89.

Neil Cooper, ‘Putting Disarmament back in the Frame’, Review of International Studies, Vol.32, No.2 (2006), pp.368–69.

John Borrie, Unacceptable Harm: How the Treaty to Ban Cluster Munitions was Won (New York: United Nations, 2009); Maxwell A.Cameron, Robert J. Lawson, and Brian W. Tomlin (eds), To Walk Without Fear: The Global Movement to Ban Landmines (Oxford: Oxford University Press,1998); Jody Williams, Stephen D. Goose, and Mary Wareham (eds), Banning Landmines: Disarmament, Citizen Diplomacy & Human Security (Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc., 2008).

John Borrie, ‘Disarmament as Humanitarian Action: From Perspective to Practice’, in John Borrie and Vanessa Martin Randin (eds), Disarmament as Humanitarian Action: From Perspective to Practice (Geneva: UNIDIR, 2006), pp.7–22.

Richard Price, The Chemical Weapons Taboo (Ithaca, NY and London: Cornell University Press, 1997); Nina Tannenwald, The Nuclear Taboo: The United States and the Non-Use of Nuclear Weapons since 1945 (Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press, 2007).

Mary Kaldor, New & Old Wars: Organized Violence in a Global Era (Stanford, CA: Stanford University Press, 1999).

Fox, ‘New Humanitarianism’(note 1), p.275.

Mary Kaldor, ‘Old Wars, Cold Wars, New Wars, and the War on Terror’, International Politics, Vol.42, No.4 (2005), pp.497–99.

Edward Newman, ‘The “New Wars” Debate: A Historical Perspective is Needed’, Security Dialogue, Vol.35, No.2 (2004), p.180.

The idea of ‘practice’ in this text refers to ‘“discursive practice” in which heterogeneous elements such as architectural design, available instruments, concepts and rules of evidence congeal into a particular structure of mutual determinations’. This is borrowed from William E.Connolly's, The Terms of Political Discourse, 2nd Edition, (New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1983), p.233.

For the purpose of this article, positivism, simply refers to problem-solving approaches, in International Relations. It asserts that problem-solving approaches in International Relations are inspired by the logic of positivism in social and political theory. It acknowledges that there is at present, only a fragmented understanding on the meaning of positivism in International Relations and is interested in the current epistemological debates on what kind of questions and practices the positivist and post-positivist approach encourages us to explore. For debates on positivism and post-positivism in International Relations, see Steve Smith, Ken Booth, and Marysia Zalewski (eds), International Theory: Positivism & Beyond (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996); Claire Turenne Sjolander and Wayne S.Cox (eds), Beyond Positivism: Critical Reflections on International Relations (Boulder, CO and London: Lynne Rienner Publishers, 1994); Mark Neufeld, The Restructuring of International Relations Theory (New York: Cambridge University Press, 1995); Martin Hollis and Steve Smith, Explaining & Understanding International Relations (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1990).

John Borrie, ‘Rethinking Multilateral Negotiations: Disarmament as Humanitarian Action’, in John Borrie and V.Martin Randin (eds), Alternative Approaches in Multilateral Decision Making: Disarmament as Humanitarian Action (Geneva: UNIDIR, 2005), p.7

Ibid.

Daniel Bodansky, ‘The Legitimacy of International Governance: A Coming Challenge for International Environmental Law?’, American Journal of International Law, Vol. 93, No.596 (1999), p.367.

Joseph Rouse, ‘Power/Knowledge’, in Gary Gutting (ed.), The Cambridge Companion to Foucault (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2005), p.97

Ibid., p.110.

Cooper, ‘Putting Disarmament Back in the Frame’ (note 2), p.374.

Hugo Slim,‘By What Authority? The Legitimacy and Accountability of Non-Governmental Organizations’, Paper presented at a meeting organized by the International Council on Human Rights Policy, Genveva, 10–12 January 2002, at: http://www.jha.ac/articles/a082.htm (accessed 22 March 2011).

Rouse, ‘Power/Knowledge’ (note 15), p.103.

Peter McAlister-Smith, ‘Humanitarian Action by Non-Governmental Organizations-National and International Perspectives’, Bulletin of Peace Proposals, Vol.18, No.2 (1987), p.120.

Stephen D. Krasner, Sovereignty – Organized Hypocrisy (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1999).

Patrick McCarthy, ‘Deconstructing Disarmament: The Challenge of Making the Disarmament and Arms Control Machinery Responsive to the Humanitarian Imperative’, in John Borrie and V. Martin Rending (eds), Alternative Approaches in Multilateral Decision Making (note 12), p.55.

McCarthy, ‘Deconstructing Disarmament’ (note 22), p.55.

David Kennedy, Of Law and War (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2006), p.7.

Stuart Maslen, ‘The Role of the International Committee of the Red Cross’, in Cameron, Lawson Tomlin (eds), To Walk Without Fear (note 3), pp.80–98.

Jean Pictet, The Fundamental Principles of the Red Cross: Commentary (Geneva: Henry Dunant Institute, 1979), p.8.

David Atwood, ‘NGOs and Multilateral Disarmament Diplomacy: Limits and Possibilities’, in John Borrie and Vanessa Martin Randin (eds), Thinking Outside the Box in Multilateral Disarmament and Arms Control Negotiations (Geneva: UNIDIR, 2006), p.40

Daniel Warner, ‘The Politics of the Political / Humanitarian Divide’, International Review of the Red Cross, No.833 (1999), pp.109–18; D. Robert DeChaine, ‘Humanitarian Space and the Social Imaginary: Medecins Sans Frontieres/Doctors Without Borders and the Rhetoric of Gobal Community’, Journal of Communication Inquiry, Vol.26, No.4 (2002), pp.354–69; Johanna Grombach Wagner, ‘An IHL/ICRC Perspective on “Humanitarian Space”’, Humanitarian Practice Network (2005), at: http://www.odihpn.org?ID=2765 (accessed 22 March 2011)

Ove Bring, ‘Regulating Conventional Weapons in the Future – Humanitarian Law or Arms Control’, Journal of Peace Research, Vol. 24, No.3 (1987), pp.275–86.

Thomas G. Weiss, ‘Principles, Politics and Humanitarian Action’, Ethics & International Affairs, Vol.13, No.1 (1999), pp.1–22.

Michael Barnett, ‘Humanitarianism Transformed’, Perspectives on Politics, Vol. 3, No. 4 (2005), pp.723–40.

Ibid., p.728.

Peter McAlister-Smith, ‘Humanitarian Action by Non-Governmental Organizations: National and International Perspectives’, Bulletin of Peace Proposals, Vol.18, No.2 (1987), p.126.

Steve Charnovitz, ‘Non-Governmental Organizations and International Law’, American Journal of International Law,Vol.100, No.348 (2006), p.348–72.

Ibid., p.356

David C. Atwood, ‘NGOs and Disarmament: Views from the Coal Face’, Disarmament Forum, Vol.1 (2002), pp.5–14.

Borrie, ‘Rethinking Multilateral Negotiations’, (note 12), p.20.

Jeffrey A. Larsen, ‘An Introduction to Arms Control’, in Jeffrey A. Larsen (ed.), Arms Control – Cooperative Security in a Changing Environment (Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner Publishers, 2002), pp.xi–xii.

Bring, ‘Regulating Conventional Weapons in the Future’ (note 29), p.277.

Kennedy, Of Law and War (note 24), p.16.

Barnett, ‘Humanitarianism Transformed’ (note 31), p.729.

Pierre Boissier, History of the International Committee of the Red Cross from Solferino to Tsushima (Geneva: Henry Dunant Institute, 1985), pp.45–84.

Henry Dunant, A Memory of Solferino (Geneva: International Committee of the Red Cross, 1986), p.124.

Atwood, ‘NGOs and Disarmament’ (note 36), p.7.

Oliver Meier and Clare Tenner, ‘Non-governmental Monitoring of International Agreements’, Verification Yearbook, (2001), pp.207–26.

Michael Crowley and Andreas Persbo, ‘The Role of Non-Governmental Organizations in the Monitoring and Verification of International Arms Control & Disarmament Agreements’, in John Borrie and Vanessa Martin Randin (eds), Thinking Outside the Box in Multilateral Disarmament & Arms Control Negotiations (Geneva: UNIDIR, 2006), p.228.

Meier and Tenner, ‘Non-governmental Monitoring’(note 45), p.210.

David Kennedy, ‘Challenging Expert Rule: The Politics of Global Governance’, in Legal Theory Workshop Series (Toronto: University of Toronto, 2006), p.11.

Kennedy, Of Law and War (note 24), p.32.

Gunnar Sjostedt, ‘Introduction’, in Gunnar Sjostedt, Guy Olivier Faure, and Winfried Lang (eds), Professional Cultures in International Negotiation: Bridge or Rift? (Oxford: Lexington Books, 2003), p.8.

W. Hays Parks, ‘Air War and the Law of War’, American Forces Law Review, Vol.32, No.3 (1977), pp.5–103.

David Kennedy, ‘Speaking Law to Power: International Law and Foreign Policy Closing Remarks’, Wisconsin International Law Journal, Vol. 23, No.173 (2005), p.178.

David Kennedy, ‘Challenging Expert Rule’ (note 48), p.13.

Ibid.

Ibid., p.11.

J. Marshall Beier, ‘Disarming Politics: Arms, Agency, and the (Post) Politics of Disarmament Advocacy’, in Colleen Bell and Tina Managhan (eds), Exceptional Measures for Exceptional Times: The State of Security Post 9/11 (Toronto: York Centre for International and Security Studies, 2006), p.219; David Mutimer, ‘A Serious Threat to Peace, Reconciliation, Safety, Security: An Effective Reading of the United Nations Programme of Action’, Contemporary Security Policy, Vol.27, No.1 (2006), pp.29–44.

Adam Daniel Rotfield, ‘The Future of Arms Control and International Security’, in Ian Anthony and Adam Daniel Rotfield (eds), A Future Arms Control Agenda – Proceedings of Nobel Symposium 118, 1999 (New York: SIPRI and Oxford University Press, 2001), p.5.

Kerstin Vignard, ‘Beyond the Peace Dividend-Disarmament, Development and Security’, Disarmament Forum, Vol.3 (2003), p.11.

Larsen, ‘An Introduction to Arms Control’ (note 38), pp. 8–9.

Peter Weiss and John Burroughs,‘Weapons of Mass Destruction and Human Rights’, Disarmament Forum, Vol.3 (2004), pp.28–31.

Johan Galtung, ‘Some Strategies in the Field of Disarmament’, Paper presented at the Forum on European Security and Cooperation, Helsinki, November 1972, pp. 6–8.

Vignard, ‘Beyond the Peace Dividend’ (note 58), p.8.

Kevin Boyle and Sigmund Simonsen, ‘Human Security, Human Rights and Disarmament’, Disarmament Forum, Vol.3 (2004), p.5.

Kanti Bajpai, ‘The Idea of Human Security’, International Studies, Vol.40, No.3 (2003), pp.195–228.

Lloyd Axworthy, ‘A New Scientific Field and Policy Lens’, Security Dialogue, Vol. 35, No.3 (2004), p.349.

Jody Williams, ‘New Approaches in a Changing World’, in Jody Williams, Stephen D.Goose, and Mary Wareham (eds), Banning Landmines: Disarmament, Citizen Diplomacy and Human Security (Lanham, MD: Rowman and Littlefield Publishers, Inc, 2008), p.291.

Ibid., pp.291–93.

Alex J. Bellamy and Matt McDonald, ‘“The Utility of Human Security”: Which Humans? What Security? A Reply to Thomas and Tow’, Security Dialogue, Vol.33, No.3 (2002), p.376.

Owen Taylor, ‘Human Security – Conflict, Critique and Consensus: Colloquium Remarks and a Proposal for a Threshold-Based Definition’, Security Dialogue, Vol.35, No.3 (2004), pp.377–8.

Bellamy and McDonald, ‘The Utility of Human Security’ (note 68), p.376.

Ibid., p.377.

Barry Buzan, ‘A Reductionist, Idealistic Notion that Adds Little Analytical Value,’ Security Dialogue, Vol. 35, No.3 (2004), pp.369–70.

Boyle and Simonsen, ‘Human Security, Human Rights and Disarmament’ (note 63), p.12.

David Kennedy, ‘A New Stream of International Law Scholarship’, Wisconsin Journal of International Law, Vol.7, No.1 (1988–1989), p.48.

Joseph, ‘Power/Knowledge’ (note 15), p.110.