Rites of Affirmation:: The Past, Present, and Future of International Humanitarian Law

Rotem Giladi

Rites of Affirmation: The Past, Present, and Future of International Humanitarian Law

Faculty of Business and Law

Research output: Chapter in Book/Report/Conference proceeding › Chapter › peer-review

Abstract

In this article I identify, demonstrate, explain, and critique two narratives used in the writing of the past of international humanitarian law (IHL). One tells of IHL’s ineluctable progress, the other of its timeless, culture-less, universal immanence. These appear at odds: one narrates the dynamic process of restraining—and humanising—war through law; the other emphasises a constant and immutable idea of humanitarian restraint that inheres in any human civilisation. Culturally, nonetheless, these two narratives share the same function: both are used to affirm, to exogenous and endogenous audiences, faith in the project to humanise war. Deconstructing these narratives as forms of social memory suggests, however, that both types express and deal with epistemic anxieties about the present achievements of that project; both, in fact, allow practitioners to come to terms with the present state of the project to humanise war by deferring the fulfilment of its promise to the indefinite future.

Original language	English
Title of host publication	Yearbook of International Humanitarian Law
Pages	33–70
Number of pages	38
Volume	24
Publication status	Published - 1 Jan 2023

Publication series

Name	Yearbook of International Humanitarian Law
Publisher	Springer
ISSN (Print)	1389-1359

Keywords

international humanitarian law
laws of war
culture
history
historiography
social memory
progress

Access to Document

https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-94-6265-559-1_2

Cite this

@inbook{6b2cb4bdbe6b46c8866319e1833ab02d,

title = "Rites of Affirmation:: The Past, Present, and Future of International Humanitarian Law ",

abstract = "In this article I identify, demonstrate, explain, and critique two narratives used in the writing of the past of international humanitarian law (IHL). One tells of IHL{\textquoteright}s ineluctable progress, the other of its timeless, culture-less, universal immanence. These appear at odds: one narrates the dynamic process of restraining—and humanising—war through law; the other emphasises a constant and immutable idea of humanitarian restraint that inheres in any human civilisation. Culturally, nonetheless, these two narratives share the same function: both are used to affirm, to exogenous and endogenous audiences, faith in the project to humanise war. Deconstructing these narratives as forms of social memory suggests, however, that both types express and deal with epistemic anxieties about the present achievements of that project; both, in fact, allow practitioners to come to terms with the present state of the project to humanise war by deferring the fulfilment of its promise to the indefinite future. ",

keywords = "international humanitarian law, laws of war, culture, history, historiography, social memory, progress",

author = "Rotem Giladi",

year = "2023",

month = jan,

day = "1",

language = "English",

volume = "24",

series = "Yearbook of International Humanitarian Law ",

publisher = "Springer",

pages = "33–70",

booktitle = "Yearbook of International Humanitarian Law",

}

TY - CHAP

T1 - Rites of Affirmation:

T2 - The Past, Present, and Future of International Humanitarian Law

AU - Giladi, Rotem

PY - 2023/1/1

Y1 - 2023/1/1

N2 - In this article I identify, demonstrate, explain, and critique two narratives used in the writing of the past of international humanitarian law (IHL). One tells of IHL’s ineluctable progress, the other of its timeless, culture-less, universal immanence. These appear at odds: one narrates the dynamic process of restraining—and humanising—war through law; the other emphasises a constant and immutable idea of humanitarian restraint that inheres in any human civilisation. Culturally, nonetheless, these two narratives share the same function: both are used to affirm, to exogenous and endogenous audiences, faith in the project to humanise war. Deconstructing these narratives as forms of social memory suggests, however, that both types express and deal with epistemic anxieties about the present achievements of that project; both, in fact, allow practitioners to come to terms with the present state of the project to humanise war by deferring the fulfilment of its promise to the indefinite future.

AB - In this article I identify, demonstrate, explain, and critique two narratives used in the writing of the past of international humanitarian law (IHL). One tells of IHL’s ineluctable progress, the other of its timeless, culture-less, universal immanence. These appear at odds: one narrates the dynamic process of restraining—and humanising—war through law; the other emphasises a constant and immutable idea of humanitarian restraint that inheres in any human civilisation. Culturally, nonetheless, these two narratives share the same function: both are used to affirm, to exogenous and endogenous audiences, faith in the project to humanise war. Deconstructing these narratives as forms of social memory suggests, however, that both types express and deal with epistemic anxieties about the present achievements of that project; both, in fact, allow practitioners to come to terms with the present state of the project to humanise war by deferring the fulfilment of its promise to the indefinite future.

KW - international humanitarian law

KW - laws of war

KW - culture

KW - history

KW - historiography

KW - social memory

KW - progress

M3 - Chapter

VL - 24

T3 - Yearbook of International Humanitarian Law

SP - 33

EP - 70

BT - Yearbook of International Humanitarian Law

ER -