Something Old, Something New, Something Borrowed … Something Blue? The Protection Potential of a Marriage of Concepts between R2P and IDP Protection

AbstractRecent proposals pin hopes on the 'responsibility to protect' (R2P) as holding tremendous promise for the protection of internally displaced persons (IDPs). This essay examines the relationship between R2P and IDP protection and explores the protection potential – and possible limitations – of marrying these two concepts. It traces their shared normative underpinnings, the historical roots of which run deep, and considers the added value that R2P can bring. It then reviews how the central tenets of R2P borrowed and built upon the conceptual framework that was crafted and cultivated over the preceding decade to guide international efforts for the protection of IDPs. Finally, it considers how R2P holds a potential key to unlock and unblock some of the persistent obstacles to an effective UN response for securing protection for IDPs, at least in certain situations when prompt protective action is particularly critical. The conclusion is that R2P and IDP protection are a good match overall, considering not only their commonalities and thus natural compatibility, but also the important ways in which they differ and can complement one another to ensure a more comprehensive protection response.

Download Full-text

International Responsibility, Protection and Displacement: Exploring the Connections between r2p, Refugees and Internally Displaced Persons

Global Responsibility to Protect ◽

10.1163/1875984x-00804005 ◽

2016 ◽

Vol 8 (4) ◽

pp. 390-409 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Elizabeth Ferris

Keyword(s):

Political Action ◽

The Other ◽

Responsibility To Protect ◽

Internally Displaced Persons ◽

Displaced Persons ◽

Internally Displaced ◽

Humanitarian Action ◽

Political Conflicts ◽

Other Hand ◽

International Responsibility

The emergence of the Responsibility to Protect (r2p) doctrine is part of a universal longing to prevent atrocities and to protect those affected by them. While its origins are quite distinct from international humanitarian principles, its links with humanitarian issues are clear. In fact, r2p emerged in response to humanitarian tragedies. This article traces the intersection of r2p and protection frameworks for refugees and internally displaced persons (idps), recognizing the important differences between them. r2p focuses on prevention, response and rebuilding – the first two tasks of which are inherently political. Conflicts cannot be prevented or resolved without engaging in political action of one kind or another. Responding to atrocities requires taking sides. Normative frameworks on refugees and idps, on the other hand, are based on the principle that people are to be assisted and protected on the basis of need alone and that humanitarian action is non-political in nature.

Download Full-text

Sovereignty as Responsibility

10.1093/oxfordhb/9780198753841.013.5 ◽

2016 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Roberta Cohen ◽

Francis M. Deng

Keyword(s):

Human Rights ◽

United Nations ◽

Secretary General ◽

Responsibility To Protect ◽

Internally Displaced Persons ◽

Displaced Persons ◽

Brookings Institution ◽

Internally Displaced ◽

Human Rights Standards

The concept of ‘sovereignty as responsibility’ is without question one of the foundations for the concept of the responsibility to protect (R2P). As United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon observed in 2008, R2P is built on the ‘positive and affirmative concept of sovereignty as responsibility—a concept developed by . . . Francis Deng, and his colleagues at the Brookings Institution more than a decade ago’. This chapter discusses how the concept of sovereignty as responsibility developed from discussions about governance in Africa and from the application of human rights standards to the protection of internally displaced persons. It also identifies the differences in emphasis, scope, and usage between the concept and R2P.

Download Full-text

WPS, Migration, and Displacement

The Oxford Handbook of Women, Peace, and Security ◽

10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190638276.013.49 ◽

2018 ◽

pp. 642-656

Author(s):

Lucy Hall

Keyword(s):

Internally Displaced Persons ◽

Displaced Persons ◽

Forced Displacement ◽

Internally Displaced ◽

Significant Potential ◽

Refugee Protection ◽

Peace And Security ◽

The Relationship

The gendered impact of forced displacement is written into the foundation of the Women, Peace, and Security (WPS) agenda. This chapter explores the relationship between the protection of internally displaced persons (IDPs), refugees, and the WPS agenda to consider the potential for closer alignment between these frameworks. The chapter distinguishes between refugees and IDPs and their corresponding normative frameworks to explore how, despite being closely related, they have in different ways and to different degrees engaged with the WPS Agenda. Tracing the relationship between refugee protection and the WPS agenda, the chapter follows with a similar discussion of the relationship between IDP protection and the WPS agenda. With reference to more recent attempts to closely align the WPS agenda with IDP and refugee protection, the possibilities and limitations of closer alignment are explored. This chapter argues that there is significant potential for the WPS agenda to be more closely aligned with the protection frameworks that address forced displacement and suggests several points of departure for displaced women, advocates, and scholars to reinvigorate feminist visions of peace and security that could more strongly unite these three normative agendas.

Download Full-text

The Responsibility to Protect Internally Displaced Persons in Africa

Journal of African Law ◽

10.1017/s0021855320000340 ◽

2021 ◽

pp. 1-28

Author(s):

Olivia Lwabukuna

Keyword(s):

Responsibility To Protect ◽

Internal Displacement ◽

State Responsibility ◽

Internally Displaced Persons ◽

Displaced Persons ◽

Effective Protection ◽

Internally Displaced ◽

Moral Principles ◽

Durable Solutions

Abstract This article explores the responsibility to protect (R2P) as an organizing concept for preventing, addressing and finding durable solutions to internal displacement in Africa. While the most innovative norms for protecting the forcibly displaced have been conceptualized in Africa, they have not durably addressed displacement, due to limitations in implementation. R2P has similarly faced criticisms emanating from a lack of clarity and distrust. Restated norms underlying frameworks for internally displaced persons (IDPs) and R2P complement each other, and can be operationalized simultaneously through a more credible regional approach, to encourage effective protection of IDPs in Africa. The article explores pillar one, pillar two and the non-coercive elements of pillar three of R2P, and its underlying moral principles, using Kenya as a case study of the process of seeking to secure state responsibility for the protection of displaced civilians victimized by mass atrocities.

Download Full-text

Violence, Displacement, and Support for Internally Displaced Persons: Evidence from Syria

Journal of Conflict Resolution ◽

10.1177/00220027211011523 ◽

2021 ◽

pp. 002200272110115

Author(s):

Alexandra C. Hartman ◽

Benjamin S. Morse ◽

Sigrid Weber

Keyword(s):

Survey Data ◽

Internally Displaced Persons ◽

Diverse Populations ◽

Displaced Persons ◽

Internally Displaced ◽

Different Types ◽

Conjoint Experiment ◽

The Government ◽

The Relationship ◽

Intergroup Behavior

What is the legacy of war, violence, and displacement on altruism toward diverse populations suffering similar hardships today? Prior research suggests these hardships have the potential to increase empathy that can in turn motivate altruism across identity boundaries. We test this hypothesis using survey data collected in 2017 from over 2,000 Syrians living in rebel-held regions where many internally displaced persons (IDPs) sought refuge. We find that Syrians previously exposed to violence were more likely to host IDPs. Using a conjoint experiment to measure hosting preferences over different types of IDPs, we show that these individuals also preferred to host sick and vulnerable IDPs and outgroup IDPs from the Kurdish ethnic minority. However, they were less likely to host IDPs from the Christian minority, possibly due to their association with the government. These results suggest that empathy and politics both play an important role in shaping the relationship between violence, altruism, and intergroup behavior during conflict.

Download Full-text