On Contested Concepts: Humanitarianism, Human Rights, and the Notion of Neutrality

Abstract

This article starts with a discussion about the international law of humanitarianism and human rights and what they indicate about trends in international relations (also known as world affairs), moves to a discussion of neutrality, and then discusses concrete examples of neutral humanitarianism in context. Its central theme is an argument for care in usage of terms, and for the utility of traditional forms of neutral humanitarianism—within definite limits.

Notes

1. Space does not permit coverage of many complexities. Pinochet never stood trial for his past decisions, being returned to Chile by the United Kingdom on alleged humanitarian grounds but more probably for political reasons. Also, in Spain, Baltasar Garzon, who had initiated legal papers against Pinochet, proved too assertive for the Spanish establishment and was eventually convicted of violation of Spanish law and barred from legal practice. These and other events suggested that activation of the principle of universal jurisdiction was and is no simple matter.

2. The abbreviation “RC” refers to both “Red Cross” and “Red Crescent” and obviates the need to write out cumbersome phrases each time. In the RC Movement, one finds both the American Red Cross and the Turkish Red Crescent among the 187 national societies that are official auxiliaries to governments representing states that have ratified the Geneva Conventions and Protocols for victims of war.