concept. It raises the question of how those issues are negotiated and therefore,
the issue of politics.
2. Humanitarianism and Politics
Professional humanitarians have long been uneasy with the idea that they are
implicated in politics. Partly this relates to the negative connotation “politics” is
often seen to have, a zone of compromise and negotiation, which might be
necessary and valuable, but contrasts sharply with other spheres of activity that are
understood as without compromise. To give one example, Daniel Barenboim is fond
of making the distinction between success in music, which requires a determination
not to compromise, and success in politics, which precisely rewards those skilled in
cutting deals. Many would like to identify a similar distinction between
humanitarianism and politics. Barenboim recently described the West-Eastern
Divan Orchestra, a musical collaboration between young Arab and Israeli musicians
founded by Barenboim in collaboration with Edward Said, as “a humanitarian idea”.
He then made clear that: “[we] don’t see ourselves as a political project”.^87 Putting
aside the unlikelihood of any project involving Edward Said being apolitical, this
seems both an implausible and an unnecessary characterisation. Surely the point is
to demonstrate that a better kind of politics, collaboration, is possible, in contrast
with the politics of mutual distrust and violence.^88
87
Daniel Barenboim, "On the West-Eastern Divan Orchestra", in Everything Is Connected:
The Power of Music 88 (London: Weidenfeld & Nicolson, 2008), 181.
The idea that musical success brooks no compromise is also somewhat dubious,
especially when it comes to classical music, in which all kinds of adjustments and
compromises take place between composer and interpreter, conductor and orchestra, as
indeed was well-illustrated by Edward Said in his writings on music. For a fascinating
collection of these, see Edward W. Said, Music at the Limits: Three Decades of Essays and
Articles on Music (London: Bloomsbury, 2008).