The latest selling point for American warfare is “smart power” humanitarianism, dispatching the U.S. military to eliminate foreign leaders designated by pundits as evildoers taking lives and resisting freedom. Ex-FBI agent Coleen Rowley warns against this latest con.However, not only are they selling war packaged in humanitarianism, but they are subverting humanitarian organizations to help sell this message! I was, indeed, sickened by the apparent ease at which some such organizations and their leaders can be subverted and/or co-opted into serving the Empire. Most astonishing example is that of Amnesty International that has an extensive history of serving the cause of human rights throughout the world. I'm sure that Suzanne Nossel, executive director of Amnesty International-USA, will have a brilliant career ahead of her as a pimp for the Empire's war machine.
In Amnesty's case I don't think that we should turn away from various chapters' humanitarian efforts because of the US parent organization. It is my impression that their member chapters function quite independently. I do think that we should raise protests against the International office wherever and whenever we can.
The author poses this rhetorical question:
If war is a lie generally, if institutional wars have historically been instigated, ratcheted up, waged, and later falsely ennobled through pretext and propaganda, if “Smart Power,” “Responsibility to Protect” and “humanitarian intervention” serve as little but better rhetoric and therefore an effective guise to sell military force to American citizens as a “last resort,” after having checked off diplomatic efforts (set up to fail) and harsh economic sanctions that starve civilians and kill children, doesn’t it make sense for human rights and peace and justice groups to renounce instead of embrace attempts of powerful governments to use them as “tools” of such policies?