lives, a consequentialist logic ultimately imposes itself upon the process of deciding
how those lives should be saved.^40 If it can be done best by a profit-seeking
company, then why not? After all, is humanitarianism not always motivated by a
variety of different justifications?^41 The piece provokes partly because in raising the
question of money and profit, it touches upon an issue with which many
professional humanitarians are profoundly uncomfortable. As pointed out in the
introduction, the Red Cross principle of voluntariness is rarely mentioned in
analytical work, because it is generally not seen to carry as much weight as ideas
such as impartiality or neutrality. But arguably it still goes deep into professional
humanitarians’ sense of self, and suggests that for many, doing the right thing for
the right reasons remains crucial (even if they are prey to much doubt about what
the right thing might be).
Moreover, for Hopgood, this kind of question fits into his broader analysis of
how humanitarianism always oscillates between the sacred and the profane. To
focus on effectiveness and what works is to risk forfeiting a grounding sense of
transcendental moral authority, which links back to the argument evoked earlier
that there is always an intangible element at stake in an act of rescue. Yet the
“keepers of the flame”, in becoming stern gatekeepers of their practice, risk having
little, or no impact in the real world, and is that not a greater danger?^42 Fine
motives, or plausible declared intentions alone can never be enough if they do not
lead to meaningful outcomes. James Orbinski also sees it as important that: “[the]
moral intention of the humanitarian act must be confronted with its actual
40
Hopgood, "Saying "No" To Wal-Mart?" A recent defence of military humanitarian
intervention from a consequentialist perspective is Eric A. Heinze, Waging Humanitarian
War: The Ethics, Law, and Politics of Humanitarian Intervention (Albany: State University of
New York Press, 2009). For a critique, see Henry Radice, "Review of Waging Humanitarian
War: The Ethics, Law, and Politics of Humanitarian Intervention. By Eric A. Heinze",
International Affairs 41 85, no. 5 (2009).
He also emphasised this in his presentation at a recent workshop. Stephen Hopgood,
"Killing with Kindness: The Moral Authority of Humanitarian Violence" ("War and the Future
of Humanitarianism" BISA Workshop, Royal Holloway, 42 University of London, 19 June 2009).
Hopgood highlighted humanitarian organisations’ reluctance to commission impact
studies at a recent talk he gave at the LSE to the staff and research students of the
International Relations Department (18 November 2009). See also Hopgood, Keepers of the
Flame.