Humanitarian advocacy is emblematic of the relief community's desire to move beyond simply treating the symptoms of suffering, and towards tackling the causes. As such, advocacy is at the front line of debates over where the boundaries between aid and politics should now be drawn and the point where dissension on the subject is most evident. In this paper the challenge that advocacy poses for traditional humanitarian operations in Darfur and the effect of such political engagement on humanitarian identity more generally is assessed. Disagreement among humanitarian organisations is exacerbated by the continued tendency of aid agencies to privilege reaction over reflection. Floundering between unachievable traditional humanitarian principles and the failure of human rights to provide an adequate alternative, humanitarianism is swiftly losing both its identity and its legitimacy. To emerge from the fog of confusion humanitarianism must now take on the professionalism of military science and endeavour to better know both itself and its enemies.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.