Repository | Book | Chapter

209320

(2001) Ethics and international relations, Basingstoke, Palgrave Macmillan.

Why fight? humanitarianism, principles and poststructuralism

David Campbell

pp. 132-160

Bosnia, Rwanda, Chechnya, Somalia, Afghanistan, Sudan: names that signify irruptions of violence and the insufficiency of international responses as much as they designate territorial states. In this context of crisis ± or what the International Crisis Group has dramatised as `millennial chaos" ± the conventional political architecture and discursive resources of International Relations are being radically problematised.1 Integral to this development is the way in which the political violence of the post-Cold War era (perhaps better understood as the `post-Cold War yet pre-epithet new era") is both deployed through and gives rise to multiple sovereignties, parallel economies, and privatised militias, all of which involve non-traditional forms of political authority in ceaseless contestation with state practices.2 Within the context of complex political emergencies, we thus see the formation of `emergent political complexes' which disturb the conventional cartography of international order.3 While such formations are neither conceptually nor politically novel, their importance can no longer be dissimulated by geopolitical modes of representation.

Publication details

DOI: 10.1057/9780230520455_7

Full citation:

Campbell, D. (2001)., Why fight? humanitarianism, principles and poststructuralism, in H. Seckinelgin & H. Shinoda (eds.), Ethics and international relations, Basingstoke, Palgrave Macmillan, pp. 132-160.

This document is unfortunately not available for download at the moment.