Digital Mind 🧠

đŸȘ” The Threshold

Human-rights discourse has replaced civilizational rhetoric as war's legitimation

Properties2
tagsja-picks, xref, causal_relationships, singleton, category/factual-claims
aliases@kumar_islamophobia_2012, loc. 466

3 min read

Human-rights discourse has replaced civilizational rhetoric as war’s legitimation

Evidence

Jean Bricmont argues in his book Humanitarian Imperialism: Using Human Rights to Sell Wars that the “ideology of our times, at least when it comes to legitimizing war, is no longer Christianity, nor Kipling’s ‘white man’s burden’ or the ‘civilizing mission’ of the French Republic, but is a certain discourse on human rights and democracy, mixed in with a particular representation of the Second World War. This discourse justifies Western interventions in the Third World in the name of the defense of democracy and human rights or against the ‘new Hitlers.’” While Bricmont may be too hasty in dismissing the uses of the “white man’s burden” logic, given the revival of Orientalism in the post-9/11 era (as discussed in chapter 3), he is correct to point to democracy and human rights as the key rationales for war. These liberal arguments, however, aren’t only the tools of liberal imperialists—they are part of the neocons’ arsenal as well. After all, the Bush administration used women’s rights as justification for the 2001 war on Afghanistan and named “democracy-building” a goal in Iraq. — Deepa Kumar, Islamophobia and the Politics of Empire, 403 (#corroborates, via linked claim)

The “clash of civilizations” rhetoric therefore became dominant in the aftermath of 9/11 and was the ideological basis for the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq as well domestic attacks on Muslims and Arabs. For a while it appeared that the neocons were unstoppable—but they overplayed their hand. During its first term, the Bush administration built a “coalition of the willing” to invade Iraq, rejecting criticisms from allies it derogatorily labeled “old Europe.” The war on Iraq, however, did not go the way the neocons wanted it to. Instead of greeting US forces as liberators, the Iraqi people resisted and rejected US hegemony. — Deepa Kumar, Islamophobia and the Politics of Empire, 421 (#contradicts, via linked claim)

Categorization

  • XREF: connects to: Liberal humanitarian rhetoric masks imperial violence and infantilizes its targets — Deepa Kumar, Islamophobia and the Politics of
, 471; Bush used women’s rights and democracy to justify war — Deepa Kumar, Islamophobia and the Politics of
, 455; Human rights advocates legitimized progressive-sounding counterinsurgency warfare — Deepa Kumar, Islamophobia and the Politics of
, 493 (+6 more)

Broader Connections

✉

Backlinks