Humanitarianism, race, and denial:: The International Committee of the Red Cross and Kenya's Mau Mau rebellion, 1952-60

Yolana Pringle

doi:10.1093/hwj/dbx035

Humanitarianism, race, and denial: The International Committee of the Red Cross and Kenya's Mau Mau rebellion, 1952-60

Yolana Pringle

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › peer-review

174 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

This article explores the humanitarian principles of universality, impartiality, and neutrality, and the moral boundaries of humanitarian action in the past. It does so through a case study of the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) and Kenya’s Mau Mau rebellion (1952–60). Drawing on the vocabulary of denial, and on the spaces in which something is both ‘known’ and ‘not-known’, it asks why the ICRC were reluctant to respond to allegations of torture in Kenya’s detention camps and prisons, and explores reasons for its later positive assessment of detention conditions. The article advances two arguments about the ICRC and Mau Mau. Firstly, that ideas about race and cultural difference helped provide a moral justification for the avoidance of politically-sensitive decisions about Kenya and may have fed into the down-playing of evidence of abuse. Secondly, that the ICRC became entangled in the British Government’s project of denial. By drawing on the language of detention and interrogation developed by the British, the ICRC fed into and confirmed an official version of events. In doing so, the article reveals the uneasy relationship between key humanitarian principles and denial, and highlights how the impartiality of classical humanitarian actors like the ICRC could be invoked by powers committing abuses and cover-ups.

Original language	English
Journal	HISTORY WORKSHOP JOURNAL
Early online date	9 Aug 2017
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1093/hwj/dbx035
Publication status	E-pub ahead of print - 9 Aug 2017

Access to Document

10.1093/hwj/dbx035

Humanitarianism, race, and denial - accepted versionAccepted author manuscript, 84.9 KB

Cite this

@article{2460e9f479b6446ea44545bc441380b5,

title = "Humanitarianism, race, and denial:: The International Committee of the Red Cross and Kenya's Mau Mau rebellion, 1952-60 ",

abstract = "This article explores the humanitarian principles of universality, impartiality, and neutrality, and the moral boundaries of humanitarian action in the past. It does so through a case study of the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) and Kenya{\textquoteright}s Mau Mau rebellion (1952–60). Drawing on the vocabulary of denial, and on the spaces in which something is both {\textquoteleft}known{\textquoteright} and {\textquoteleft}not-known{\textquoteright}, it asks why the ICRC were reluctant to respond to allegations of torture in Kenya{\textquoteright}s detention camps and prisons, and explores reasons for its later positive assessment of detention conditions. The article advances two arguments about the ICRC and Mau Mau. Firstly, that ideas about race and cultural difference helped provide a moral justification for the avoidance of politically-sensitive decisions about Kenya and may have fed into the down-playing of evidence of abuse. Secondly, that the ICRC became entangled in the British Government{\textquoteright}s project of denial. By drawing on the language of detention and interrogation developed by the British, the ICRC fed into and confirmed an official version of events. In doing so, the article reveals the uneasy relationship between key humanitarian principles and denial, and highlights how the impartiality of classical humanitarian actors like the ICRC could be invoked by powers committing abuses and cover-ups.",

author = "Yolana Pringle",

year = "2017",

month = aug,

day = "9",

doi = "10.1093/hwj/dbx035",

language = "English",

journal = "HISTORY WORKSHOP JOURNAL",

issn = "1363-3554",

publisher = "Oxford University Press",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Humanitarianism, race, and denial:

T2 - The International Committee of the Red Cross and Kenya's Mau Mau rebellion, 1952-60

AU - Pringle, Yolana

PY - 2017/8/9

Y1 - 2017/8/9

N2 - This article explores the humanitarian principles of universality, impartiality, and neutrality, and the moral boundaries of humanitarian action in the past. It does so through a case study of the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) and Kenya’s Mau Mau rebellion (1952–60). Drawing on the vocabulary of denial, and on the spaces in which something is both ‘known’ and ‘not-known’, it asks why the ICRC were reluctant to respond to allegations of torture in Kenya’s detention camps and prisons, and explores reasons for its later positive assessment of detention conditions. The article advances two arguments about the ICRC and Mau Mau. Firstly, that ideas about race and cultural difference helped provide a moral justification for the avoidance of politically-sensitive decisions about Kenya and may have fed into the down-playing of evidence of abuse. Secondly, that the ICRC became entangled in the British Government’s project of denial. By drawing on the language of detention and interrogation developed by the British, the ICRC fed into and confirmed an official version of events. In doing so, the article reveals the uneasy relationship between key humanitarian principles and denial, and highlights how the impartiality of classical humanitarian actors like the ICRC could be invoked by powers committing abuses and cover-ups.

AB - This article explores the humanitarian principles of universality, impartiality, and neutrality, and the moral boundaries of humanitarian action in the past. It does so through a case study of the International Committee of the Red Cross (ICRC) and Kenya’s Mau Mau rebellion (1952–60). Drawing on the vocabulary of denial, and on the spaces in which something is both ‘known’ and ‘not-known’, it asks why the ICRC were reluctant to respond to allegations of torture in Kenya’s detention camps and prisons, and explores reasons for its later positive assessment of detention conditions. The article advances two arguments about the ICRC and Mau Mau. Firstly, that ideas about race and cultural difference helped provide a moral justification for the avoidance of politically-sensitive decisions about Kenya and may have fed into the down-playing of evidence of abuse. Secondly, that the ICRC became entangled in the British Government’s project of denial. By drawing on the language of detention and interrogation developed by the British, the ICRC fed into and confirmed an official version of events. In doing so, the article reveals the uneasy relationship between key humanitarian principles and denial, and highlights how the impartiality of classical humanitarian actors like the ICRC could be invoked by powers committing abuses and cover-ups.

U2 - 10.1093/hwj/dbx035

DO - 10.1093/hwj/dbx035

M3 - Article

SN - 1363-3554

JO - HISTORY WORKSHOP JOURNAL

JF - HISTORY WORKSHOP JOURNAL

ER -