{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.01452081316553727, 'fraction_numerical': 0.003872216844143272, 'mean_word_length': 5.758169934640523, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Humanitarian war: a new consensus?

The NATO bombing operation Allied Force against Yugoslavia in March-June 1999 represents the final disappearance of the narrowing divide between humanitarianism and politics: a war initiated and justified on humanitarian grounds. Although unlikely to be repeated any time soon, the Kosovo case appears to have cemented an ideological shift on the international right and even necessity of sing military force to protect civilians within sovereign states. Rather than humanitarians acknowledging the political context and consequences of their work, however, the case suggests the embrace of humanitarian principles of universality and neutrality by military organisations. This article discusses some consequences of the new consensus: neglect of the political context (both local and foreign) of such operations, interaction between the operational dynamics of relief operations and the logic of war and the political consequences of using the humanitarian legitimation and mission in such cases.