Introduction

Though of ancient origin, the concept of cosmopolitanism remains salient, not least within contemporary rights discourse (Anderson-Gold 2001; Tan 2004; Appiah 2006; Benhabib 2006; Fine 2007; Douzinas 2007). The concept's normative emphasis on the ideal of value being shared by all of humanity, within circles of affiliation going beyond family, the local, or even national ties (Nussbaum 1997: 9), helpfully underlines the universality of each human life ‘beyond … the ties of kith and kin’ (Appiah 2006: xv). Its institutional implications promulgate the ideal of a common community which can be viewed as reflected in the emergence of post-1945 federations of nations which sponsor international human rights and humanitarian laws.

Yet, can these concepts of cosmopolitanism hold fast in the face of contemporary terrorism? Jihadi movements like Al-Qa'ida have been criticised as ‘counter-cosmopolitans’ (Appiah 2006: 143). Their doctrine denies plural value, and their action consists too often of brutal and catastrophic attacks in apparent denial of any shared humanity. In turn, states are motivated by terrorism to raise the drawbridge on cosmopolitan comity and to adopt exceptionalism in foreign affairs (described in the chapter by Jason Ralph) and irreconcilable forms of illiberal nationalism at home. Governments become willing to demonise those who reject their values (Thobani 2007) and to proffer for their own purposes a ruthless and violent ‘lesser evil’ in order to combat the greater evil of terrorism, so that human rights are no longer trumps in the age of terror, even against torture (Ignatieff 2004; Dershowitz 2002).