Humanitarian intervention (HI) and the responsibility to protect (R2P): the United Nations and international security

2020 ◽  
pp. 1-18
Author(s):  
Dele Jemirade
Author(s):  
See Seng Tan

This chapter examines extant understandings of sovereignty as responsibility, beginning with the idea of sovereign responsibility as conceptualised by Francis Deng and his collaborators, who contend that sovereignty can no longer be seen as a protection against interference, but as a charge of responsibility where the state is accountable to both domestic and external constituencies. The understanding is foundational to the thinking behind the 2001 International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty (ICISS) report, which introduced the responsibility to protect (R2P) with the aim to popularise the concept of humanitarian intervention and democracy-restoring intervention. Since its endorsement by the United Nations, the R2P has evolved through efforts by the UN and others to enhance, operationalise as well as to implement it in actual crisis situations – with varying degrees of success and in some instances not without controversy. The chapter discusses the relevance of the sovereignty as responsibility idea to Southeast Asia. It also examines the existing academic and policy debate over the R2P and its relevance to international security and sovereign responsibility, as well as its ambivalent reception in Southeast Asia.


2009 ◽  
Vol 53 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-33 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jeremy Sarkin

AbstractThis article examines the basis for humanitarian intervention (HI) in the United Nations Charter, the African Union (AU) Charter and in a number of African sub-regional institutions. It traces the historical development of HI and argues that, while the right to HI emerged more than 100 years ago, that right also emerges from the Genocide Convention. The article argues that this treaty connects HI to the developing norm of the responsibility to protect (R2P) and examines the extent to which R2P is garnering wider support around the world. It focuses on the UN, and the various AU and sub-regional institutions and instruments that sanction HI. It assesses whether intervention can be authorized even in the absence of a UN Security Council mandate and examines the principles, application and interrelationship of R2P and HI in the African context. It traces the use of these norms in Africa, including in the various sub-regional structures, and evaluates the AU's political will and capability to deal with conflict and human rights abuse.


Author(s):  
Alex J. Bellamy

Peacebuilding and statebuilding were integral parts of the Responsibility to Protect (R2P) when the principle was first articulated in 2001. But since 2005 they have developed quite separately, creating a gap between the theories and practices of protection and peacebuilding. The effects of this gap are not just theoretical but practical too. The UN’s failure to properly follow through with rebuilding support in Libya contributed to that country’s descent into chaos and civil war, especially after 2013. Likewise a failure to incorporate atrocity-prevention concerns into ongoing peacebuilding efforts in places like Sri Lanka and the Central African Republic meant that the UN’s field presences did not do all they could to prevent atrocities or protect vulnerable populations. This chapter examines the relationship between peacebuilding and R2P in the UN context. It shows how the two were conceived as being mutually supporting activities but were separated during the UN’s wider deliberations on reform. It describes the effects of this gap between peacebuilding and protection before arguing that the two agendas are closely aligned and should be integrated. And it points to practical work to ensure that atrocity prevention is mainstreamed into peacebuilding efforts, and vice versa.


Author(s):  
Alex J. Bellamy

The implementation of principles such as the Responsibility to Protect (R2P) is notoriously inconsistent. Some crises attract significant political attention and resources, others much less. This chapter briefly examines the question of consistency and inconsistency in the implementation of R2P since 2005. It argues for a broader understanding of protection, one that draws on a comprehensive universe of relevant cases and that includes all the different types of actors engaged in protection activities. It does so in four parts. The first outlines the normative standard established by R2P and the question of legal and moral rights and duties that are implied by this project. The second explains some of the recent crises that have exposed a gap between principle and practice. The third examines the question of how we understand and evaluate consistency in protection practices. The fourth provides a preliminary examination of practice since 2005, focusing on the United Nations’ experience on the ground.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document