Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-dzt6s Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-25T17:57:23.318Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

International paternalism and humanitarian governance

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  26 September 2012

MICHAEL N BARNETT
MICHAEL N BARNETT*
Affiliation:
Elliott School of International Affairs, George Washington University, 1957 E St. NW, Washington, DC 20052
*
*Email: barnett@gwu.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This article argues that paternalism is an organizing principle of the international humanitarian order. The international community is increasingly organized to preserve, protect, and promote human life, reflecting an ethics of care and impulse to intervene for the greater good. This mixture of care and control is captured by the concept of paternalism, which Gerald Dworkin famously defined as ‘the interference with a person’s liberty of action justified by reasons referring exclusively to the welfare, good, happiness, needs, interests or values of the person being coerced’. Paternalism is either present or dormant in many (if not nearly all) interventions that are designed for the betterment of people and the good of humanity. This article has four goals: 1) to reassess and examine the analytical power of this much maligned and misunderstood concept; 2) to consider the dimensions upon which paternalism varies in order to develop the concept’s value for empirical analysis; 3) to speculate how and why paternalism’s form has moved from ‘strong’ to ‘weak’ over the last hundred years; and, 4) to consider whether, why, and when paternalism might be legitimate.

Keywords

humanitarianisminternational ethicsinternational orderliberalismpaternalism
Type
Articles
Information
Global Constitutionalism , Volume 1 , Issue 3 , November 2012 , pp. 485 - 521
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2012

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

1 Fassin, D, ‘Humanitarianism: a Nongovernmental Government’ in Feher, M (ed), Nongovernmental Politics (Zone Books, New York, 2007) 151.Google Scholar

2 Barnett, MN, Empire of Humanity: A History of Humanitarianism (Cornell University Press, Ithaca, 2011).Google Scholar

3 Dworkin, G, ‘Paternalism’ (1972) 56 The Monist 64–84Google Scholar, esp. 70–76.

4 However, see Long, D, ‘Paternalism and the Internationalization of Imperialism: JA Hobson on the International Government of the “Lower Races”’, in Long, D and Schmidt, B (eds), Imperialism and Internationalism in the Discipline of International Relations (SUNY Press, Albany, 2005) 71–93Google Scholar; Hobson, J, The Eurocentric Conception of World Politics: Western International Theory, 1760–2010 (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2012)Google Scholar; and McCarthy, T, Race, Empire, and the Idea of Human Development (Cambridge University Press, New York, 2009).Google Scholar

5 Reus-Smit, C, American Power and World Order (Polity, New York, 2004)Google Scholar; Nye, J, The Power to Lead (Oxford University Press, New York, 2010)Google Scholar; Sorenson, G, A Liberal World Order in Crisis: Choosing Between Imposition and Restraint (Cornell University Press, Ithaca, 2011).Google Scholar

6 Jackson, RH, The Global Covenant: Human Conduct in a World of States (Oxford University Press, New York, 2000)Google Scholar; Wheeler, NJ, Saving Strangers (Oxford University Press, New York, 2001).Google Scholar

7 For statements on liberal empire and the liberal international order, see Muthu, S, Enlightenment Against Empire (Princeton University Press, Princeton, 2003)Google Scholar; Pitts, J, A Turn to Empire: The Rise of Imperial Liberalism in Britain and France (Princeton University Press, Princeton, 2005)Google Scholar; Metha, S, Liberalism and Empire: A Study in Nineteenth-Century British Liberal Thought (Chicago University Press, Chicago, 1999)Google Scholar; Hobson (n 4); Ikenberry, GJ, Liberal Order and Imperial Ambition (Polity Press, London, 2006)Google Scholar; Ikenberry, , Liberal Leviathan: The Origins, Crisis, and Transformation of the American World Order (Princeton University Press, Princeton, 2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Sorenson (n 5).

8 Keohane, RO, After Hegemony: Power and Discord in International Politics (Princeton University Press, Princeton, 1984).Google Scholar

9 Keck, ME and Sikkink, K, Activists Beyond Borders (Cornell University Press, Ithaca, 1998).Google Scholar

10 Robinson, F, Globalizing Care: Ethics, Feminist Theory, and International Relations (Westview Press, Boulder, 1999)Google Scholar. For statements regarding an ethics of care, see Deveaux, M, ‘Shifting Paradigms: Theorizing Care and Justice in Political Theory’ (1995) 10 Hypatia 115–19Google Scholar; Tronto, JC, ‘Care as a Basis for Radical Political Judgments’ (1995) 10 Hypatia 141–49Google Scholar; Engster, D, ‘Mary Wollstonecraft’s Nurturing Liberalism: Between an Ethic of Justice and Care’ (2001) 95 American Political Science Review 577–88.Google Scholar

11 Jones, RW (ed), Critical Theory and World Politics (Lynne Rienner, Boulder, 2001)Google Scholar; Linklater, A, Critical Theory and World Politics: Citizenship, Sovereignty and Humanity (Routledge, New York, 2007)Google Scholar; Linklater, A, The Problem of Harm in World Politics: Theoretical Investigations (Cambridge University Press, New York, 2011)Google Scholar. For a sophisticated consideration of the tensions as they pertain to humanitarianism, see Fassin, D, Humanitarian Reason (University of California Press, Berkeley, 2011).Google Scholar

12 On governmentality in international relations, see Neumann, I and Sending, OJ, Governing the Global Polity: Practice, Mentality, and Rationality (University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor, 2010).Google Scholar

13 For arguments regarding the variations in international liberalism, Zacher, MW and Matthews, RA, ‘Liberal International Theory: Common Threads, Divergent Strands’ in Kegley, CW (ed), Controversies in International Relations Theory: Realism and the Neoliberal Challenge (St. Martin’s, New York, 1995) 107–50Google Scholar; Richardson, JL, ‘Contending Liberalisms: Past and Present’ (1997) 3 European Journal of International Relations 5–34Google Scholar; Simpson, G, ‘The Ethics of the New Liberalism’ in Reus-Smit, C and Snidal, D (eds), Oxford Handbook of International Relations (Oxford University Press, New York, 2008)Google Scholar ch 14.

14 Mill, JS, On Liberty (WW Norton, New York, 1975) 10–11.Google Scholar

15 Narayan, U, ‘Colonialism and Its Others: Consideration on Rights and Care Discourses’ (1995) 10 Hypatia 133–40.Google Scholar

16 See (n 3) 64–84. For a sampling of the definitional debate, see Thompson, DJ, Political Ethics and Public Office (Harvard University Press, Cambridge, 1987)Google Scholar ch 6; Archard, D, ‘Paternalism Defined’ (1990) 50 Analysis 36–42Google Scholar; Garren, DJ, ‘Paternalism, Part I’ (2006) 47 Philosophical Books 334–41Google Scholar; Garren, DJ, ‘Paternalism, Part II’ (2007) 48 Philosophical Books 50–9Google Scholar; G Dworkin (n 3) 64–84; Gert, B and Culver, CM, ‘Paternalistic Behavior’ (1976) 6 Philosophy and Public Affairs 45–58Google Scholar; Van De Veer, D, Paternalistic Intervention: The Moral Bounds of Benevolence (Princeton University Press, Princeton, 1986)Google Scholar; Mead, LM, ‘The Rise of Paternalism’ in Mead, LM (ed), The New Paternalism: Supervisory Approaches to Poverty (Brookings Institution, Washington DC, 1997) 1–38Google Scholar; Husak, DN, ‘Legal Paternalism’ in LaFollette, H (ed), The Oxford Handbook of Practical Ethics (Oxford University Press, New York, 2003) 387–412Google Scholar; Kelman, S, ‘Regulation and Paternalism’ (1981) 29 Public Policy 219–54Google Scholar; and Grill, K, ‘The Normative Core of Paternalism’ (2007) 13 Res Publica 441–58.Google Scholar

17 See Kelman (n 16); Grill (n 16); Applbaum, AI, ‘Forcing a People to Be Free’ (2007) 35 Philosophy and Public Affairs 371.Google Scholar

18 McCarthy (n 4) 175.

19 Dirks, NB, The Scandal of Empire: India and the Creation of Imperial Britain (Harvard University Press, Cambridge, 2006).Google Scholar

20 Duffield, M, Global Governance and the New Wars (Zed Books, New York, 2001).Google Scholar

21 den Hartogh, G, ‘Can Consent be Presumed?’ (2011) 28 Journal of Applied Philosophy 294–307.Google Scholar

22 Shafer-Landau, R, ‘Liberalism and Paternalism’ (2005) 11 Legal Theory 169–91.Google Scholar

23 See Tversky, A and Kahneman, D, ‘The Framing of Decisions and the Psychology of Choice’ (1981) 211 Science 453–58Google Scholar; Tversky, and Kahneman, , ‘Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases’ (1974) 185 Science 1124–31Google Scholar. For an explicit connection between this work and paternalism, see Sunstein, CR and Thaler, RH, ‘Libertarian Paternalism Is Not an Oxymoron’ (2003) 70 The University of Chicago Law Review 1159–1202Google Scholar; and Ben-Porath, S, Tough Choices: Structured Paternalism and the Landscape of Choice (Princeton University Press, Princeton, 2010).Google Scholar

24 See McCarthy (n 4) 169; Mehta (n 7).

25 See McCarthy (n 4) 170.

26 Habibi, D, ‘The Moral Dimensions of J. S. Mill’s Colonialism’ (1999) 30 Journal of Social Philosophy 125–46.Google Scholar

27 See Barnett (n 2) 42, for a survey of these sources of compassion.

28 The following discussion relies on Soss, J, Fording, RC, and Schram, S, Disciplining the Poor: Neoliberal Paternalism and the Persistent Power of Race (University of Chicago Press, Chicago, 2011) 24–5.Google Scholar

29 Kinsella, HM, The Image Before the Weapon (Cornell University Press, Ithaca, 2011).Google Scholar

30 See Soss et al (n 28) 24.

31 See Soss et al (n 28).

32 Neumann and Sending (n 12).

33 See Barnett, MN and Duvall, R, ‘Power in International Politics’ (2005) 59 International Organization 39–75.Google Scholar

34 On modern international sovereignty and the conditions under which states might confer or expect recognition from other states, see Koskenniemi, M, The Gentle Civilizer of Nations: The Rise and Fall of International Law 1870–1960 (Cambridge University Press, New York, 2002)Google Scholar; Crawford, J, The Creation of States in International Law (2nd edn, Cambridge University Press, New York, 2006) 45–86Google Scholar; and Osiander, A, ‘Sovereignty, International Relations, and the Westphalian Myth’ (2001) 55 International Organization 251–87.Google Scholar

35 See Applbaum (n 17).

36 See Jackson (n 6) 412, cited in Søbjerg, LM, ‘Trusteeship and the Concept of Freedom’ (2007) 33 Review of International Studies 475–88Google Scholar. Also see Bain, W, Between Anarchy and Society: Trusteeship and the Obligations of Power (Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2003) 26, 173Google Scholar; Bain, W, ‘The Political Theory of Trusteeship and the Twilight of International Equality’ (2003) 17 International Relations 59–77Google Scholar; and Bain, W, ‘In Praise of Folly: International Administration and the Corruption of Humanity’ (2006) 82 International Affairs 525–38Google Scholar. However, see Søbjerg above.

37 Zaum, D, The Sovereignty Paradox: The Norms and Politics of International Statebuilding (Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2007).Google Scholar

38 See, for example, ‘The Paris Declaration on Aid Effectiveness and the Accra Agenda for Action’, available at <http://www.oecd.org/development/aideffectiveness/34428351.pdf > accessed 30 July 2012.

39 David Brown, ‘Surgeon seeks to prevent “unnecessary amputations” in Haiti’s earthquake zone’, Washington Post, 21 January 2010, available at <http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/01/20/AR2010012004646.html> accessed 30 July 2012.

40 See, for instance, Mead (n 16), Archard (n 16), and Van De Veer (n 16).

41 Barnett, MN and Finnemore, M, Rules for the World (Cornell University Press, Ithaca, 2004)Google Scholar ch 3.

42 Westerbrook, R, ‘An Uncommon Faith: Pragmatism and Religious Experience’ in Rosenbaum, SE (ed), Pragmatism and Religion (University of Illinois, Urbana, 2003) 194.Google Scholar

43 Ibid 192.

44 Ibid 195.

45 Hopgood, S, ‘Moral Authority, Modernity and the Politics of the Sacred’ (2009) 15 European Journal of International Relations 229–55Google Scholar; and Feldman, I and Ticktin, M, ‘Government and Humanity’ in Feldman, I and Ticktin, M (eds), In the Name of Humanity: The Government of Threat and Care (Duke University Press, Durham, 2011) 1–27.Google Scholar

46 Ibid.

47 See Sunstein and Thaler (n 23); Sunstein, CR and Thaler, RH, Nudge: Improving Decisions About Health, Wealth, and Happiness (Yale University Press, New Haven, 2008)Google Scholar; Thaler, RH and Sunstein, CR, ‘Libertarian Paternalism’ (2003) 93 American Economic Review 175–79Google Scholar; and Sunstein, CR, ‘Preferences, Paternalism, and Liberty’ (2006) 81 Royal Institute of Philosophy Supplement 233–64.Google Scholar

48 See Sunstein and Thaler (n 23) 1162.

49 Ibid 1201.

50 See Ben-Porath (n 23). Concepts such as libertarian paternalism and structured paternalism exist in a grey zone between constraint and interference without consent, and, to my mind, probably lean closer to the former than the latter, and worryingly widen the meaning of paternalism to the point that it becomes indistinguishable from all forms of intervention that do respect consent.

51 For various statements on these issues, see Sunstein, CR, Free Markets and Social Justice (Oxford University Press, New York, 1997), 128–50Google Scholar; Brint, S, In an Age of Experts: The Changing Role of Professionals in Politics and Public Life (Princeton University Press, Princeton, 1996)Google Scholar; Goldman, M, ‘The Birth of a Discipline: Producing Authoritative Green Knowledge, World Bank-Style’ (2001) 2 Ethnography 191–217.Google Scholar

52 Haskell, TL (ed), The Authority of Experts: Studies in History and Theory (Indiana University Press, Bloomington, 1984).Google Scholar

53 White, JA, Democracy, Justice, and the Welfare State: Reconstructing Public Care (Penn State Press, University Park, PA, 2000) 5Google Scholar; Soss et al (n 28).

54 See Sunstein and Thaler (n 23); Haskell (n 52) ix–xxxix. On professions and paternalism, see Thompson (n 16) 161–64.

55 Larson, MS, ‘The Production of Expertise and Constitution of Expert Power’ in Haskell, TL (ed), The Authority of Experts: Studies in History and Theory (Indiana University Press, Bloomington, 1984) 39.Google Scholar

56 Sugden, Robert, ‘Why Incoherent Preferences Do Not Justify Paternalism’ (2008) 19 Constitutional Political Economy 229.Google Scholar

57 Ibrahim, A and Weisband, E (eds), Global Accountabilities (Cambridge University Press, New York, 2007).Google Scholar

58 On racism see McCarthy (n 4) 84, 230; Barkan, E, The Retreat of Scientific Racism: Changing Concepts of Race in Britain and the United States between the Wars (Cambridge University Press, New York, 1992)Google Scholar. On development, see Easterly, W, The White Man’s Burden: Why the West’s Efforts to Aid the Rest Have Done So Much Ill and So Little Good (Penguin Books, New York, 2007).Google Scholar

59 Hochshild, A, Bury the Chains: Prophets and Rebels in the Fight to Free an Empire’s Slaves (Mariner Books, San Francisco, 2006) 314.Google Scholar

60 Stanley, B, ‘Christianity and Civilization in English Evangelical Mission Thought, 1792–1857’ in Stanley, B (ed), Christian Missions and the Enlightenment (Curzon Press, Grand Rapids, 2001) 170–71.Google Scholar

61 See Stanley (n 60) 172.

62 For three excellent intellectual histories of the leading thinkers on the subject of the relationship between liberalism and imperialism, see Muthu (n 7), Pitts (n 7), and Mehta (n 7).

63 See Long (n 4) 76–7.

64 Varg, PA, ‘Motives in Protestant Missions, 1890–1917’ (1954) 23 Church History 75–8.Google Scholar

65 Adas, M, Machines as a Measure of Men: Science, Technology, and Ideologies of Western Dominance (Cornell University Press, Ithaca, 1990).Google Scholar

66 Manela, E, The Wilsonian Moment: Self-Determination and the International Origins of Anticolonial Nationalism (Oxford University Press, New York, 2009)Google Scholar; Fox, GH, Humanitarian Occupation (Cambridge University Press, New York, 2008) 1–16.Google Scholar

67 See Fox (n 66) 59–69.

68 Rawls, J, The Law of the Peoples (Harvard University Press, Cambridge, 2001)Google Scholar. For a discussion of this Rawlsian-centred analysis and the general question of interference in post-war situations, see Recchia, S, ‘Just and Unjust War Reconstruction: Just How Much Interference Can Be Justified?’ (2009) 23 Ethics and International Affairs 165–87.Google Scholar

69 However, Marxist ideologies also contained their own strands of developmentalism.

70 See Cooper, F, ‘Modernizing Bureaucrats, Backward Africans, and the Development Concept’ in Cooper, F and Packard, R (eds), International Development and the Social Sciences (University of California Press, Berkeley, 1998)Google Scholar; Duffield, M, Development, Security, and Unending War (Polity Press, Cambridge, 2007)Google Scholar; MN Barnett (n 2); Anderson, W, Colonial Pathologies: American Tropical Medicine, Race, and Hygiene in the Philippines (Duke University Press, Durham, 2006)Google Scholar; Connelly, MJ, Fatal Misconception: The Struggle to Control World Population (Harvard University Press, Cambridge, 2008)Google Scholar; Mazower, M, No Enchanted Palace: The End of Empire and the Ideological Origins of the United Nations (Princeton University Press, Princeton, 2008)Google Scholar; Morefield, J, Covenants Without Swords: Idealist Liberalism and the Spirit of Empire (Princeton University Press, Princeton, 2005) 108–12.Google Scholar

71 See Finnemore, M, The Purpose of Force (Cornell University Press, Ithaca, 2004).Google Scholar

72 See, for instance, Stefano Recchia (n 68); K Lidén, ‘Can Self-Determination Be Promoted through Political Interference? The Principle of Representative Governance’ unpublished manuscript (December 2011).

73 Keohane, RO, ‘Political Authority after Intervention: Gradations in Sovereignty’ in Holzgrefe, JL and Keohane, RO (eds), Humanitarian Intervention: Ethical, Legal, and Political Dilemmas (Cambridge University Press, New York, 2003) 275–98Google Scholar; Krasner, S, ‘The Case for Shared Sovereignty’(2005) 16 Journal of Democracy 69–83Google Scholar; Krasner, S, ‘Sharing Sovereignty: New Institutions for Collapsed and Failing States’ (2004) 29 International Security 85–120Google Scholar; and Fearon, JD and Laitin, DD, ‘Neotrusteeship and the Problem of Weak States’ (2004) 28 International Security 5–43.Google Scholar

74 Søbjerg (n 36) 479.

75 On liberal peacebuilding see, Paris, R, At War’s End: Building Peace after Civil Conflict (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2004)Google Scholar; Ponzio, RJ, ‘Transforming Political Authority: UN Democratic Peacebuilding in Afghanistan’ (2007) 13 Global Governance 255–75Google Scholar; Chandler, DC, Empire in Denial: The Politics of State-Building (Pluto Press, London, 2006)Google Scholar; and M Duffield (n 20).

76 For a compatible observation, see McCarthy (n 4) 181; J Morefield (n 70).

77 Watenpaugh, KD, ‘The League of Nations’ Rescue of Armenian Genocide Survivors and the Making of Modern Humanitarianism, 1920–1927’ (2010) 115 American Historical Review 1315–39Google Scholar; Mitchell, T, Rule of Experts: Egypt, Techno-Politics, Modernity (University of California Press, Berkeley, 2002)Google Scholar; MN Barnett and M Finnemore (n 41).

78 Walker, P, Hein, K, Russ, C, Bertleff, G, and Caspersz, D, ‘A Blueprint for Professionalizing Humanitarian Assistance’ (2010) 29 Health Affairs 2223–30.Google Scholar

79 Cornwall, A and Brock, K, ‘What do Buzzwords do for Development Policy? A Critical Look at “Participation”, “Empowerment”, and “Poverty Reduction”’ (2005) 26 Third World Quarterly 1043–60Google Scholar; A Wennmann, ‘Aid Effectiveness between “Top-Down” and “Bottom-up” Statebuilding’, CCDP Working Paper, Graduate Institute, Geneva, 2010. On peace-building, see Ford, CE and Oppenheim, B, ‘Neotrusteeship or Mistrusteeship? The “Authority Creep” Dilemma in United Nations Transitional Administration’ (2008) 41 Vanderbilt Journal of Transnational Law 55–105.Google Scholar

80 MacGinty, R, ‘Hybrid Peace: The Interaction between Top-Down and Bottom-Up Peace’ (2010) 41 Security Dialogue 391–412Google Scholar; Chesterman, S, You, the People: The United Nations, Transitional Administration, and State-Building (Oxford University Press, New York, 2004)Google Scholar; Richmond, OP, A Post-Liberal Peace (Routledge Press, New York, 2012)Google Scholar; C Sriram, O Martin-Ortega, and J Herman, ‘Strategies of Peacebuilding and Accountability: An Assessment of Contemporary Trends in Practice’, paper presented at the annual meeting of the International Studies Association, New York, 15 February 2009.

81 Scott, D, ‘The Traditions of Historical Others’ (2012) 8 Gender, Race, and PhilosophyGoogle Scholar; and Rajagopal, B, International Law from Below: Development, Social Movements, and Third World Resistance (Cambridge University Press, New York, 2003).Google Scholar

82 See, for instance, Kirkpatrick, JJ, ‘Global Paternalism: The UN and the New International Regulatory Order’ (1983) Regulation 17–22.Google Scholar

83 Rorty, R, Truth and Progress: Philosophical Papers (Cambridge University Press, New York, 1998) 183Google Scholar. Also see Kinsella, HM, The Image Before the Weapon (Cornell University Press, Ithaca, 2011) 45Google Scholar, where she attributes advances in international humanitarian law to gendered-notions of protection.

84 Feinberg, J, Harm to Self (Oxford University Press, New York, 1986) 25Google Scholar; cited in de Marnefee, P, ‘Avoiding Paternalism’ (2006) 34 Philosophy and Public Affairs 69–94.Google Scholar

85 McCarthy (n 4) 183.

86 Price, R, ‘Moral Limit and Possibility in World Politics’ (2008) 62 International Organization 191–220.Google Scholar

87 McCarthy (n 4) 189.

88 See Chesterman (n 80).

89 See McCarthy (n 4) 189.

90 See Thompson (n 16) 156.