scholarly journals The Road Not Taken: Failure to Protect from Atrocity Crimes in Myanmar

2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. 78-100
Author(s):  
Malina Greta Meret Gepp
Keyword(s):  
Legal Status ◽  
International Community ◽  
Responsibility To Protect ◽  
Best Interest ◽  
The Road ◽  
The Past ◽  
Mass Atrocity ◽  
Failure To Protect ◽  
Heads Of State ◽  
Atrocity Crimes

In 2005, more than 150 heads of State and government pledged that the world must never witness another Rwanda. They accepted the Responsibility to Protect (R2P) both their own populations, and those of other States from atrocity crimes. Yet, in late August 2017, thousands of Rohingya had to flee from the alleged genocide taking place in their home, northern Rakhine in Myanmar. The international community, equipped with a toolbox developed and refined over the past 12 years, does nothing more than politely asking Myanmar to stop. This begs the question: to what extent can the Responsibility to Protect doctrine be used to save the Rohingya from atrocities committed against them? This article explores the potential application of the R2P in the context of Myanmar by exploring the root causes of the alleged genocide, the legal status of the R2P and various options open to the international community to protect the Rohingya. The case is made that applying the R2P – in its current shape and form – would be in the best interest of the Rohingya. After all, the international community cannot stand by in the wake of another mass atrocity. 

scholarly journals Towards International Legitimization of the Responsibility to Protect’s Third Pillar

2019 ◽  
Vol 8 (3) ◽  
pp. 50
Author(s):  
Arsalan H. AlMizory
Keyword(s):  
International Law ◽  
Security Council ◽  
Responsibility To Protect ◽  
Sovereign State ◽  
New Era ◽  
The Past ◽  
Un Security Council ◽  
Mass Atrocity ◽  
Atrocity Crimes

Over the past few years, the question whether international law permits the use of force not in response to existing violence but to avert and prevent mass atrocity crimes occurring within the boundaries of a sovereign State has taken on added significant in the aftermath of the humanitarian tragedies of the 1990s. Responsibility to Protect (R2P) is a complicated and emerging norm of international law, which represents the start of a new era for the United Nations (UN), seeks to provide a means for the Security Council to take enforcement measures under Chapter VII to prevent mass atrocity crimes. The research discusses that when the Security Council is deadlock and peaceful measures have been exhausted, it is important to have a legal basis of using limited armed force as a last resort in the name of humanitarian intervention, to avert overwhelmingly atrocity crimes that a government has shown it is unwilling or unable to prevent. The research analyzes the case of Syria as a case study, which demonstrates that the presence of certain conditions enables the UN Security Council to implement R2P norm to save civilian populations from mass human rights violations.

scholarly journals The Failure of the International Community to Apply R2P and Atrocity Prevention in Myanmar

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-20
Author(s):  
Martin Mennecke ◽  
Ellen E. Stensrud
Keyword(s):  
International Community ◽  
Responsibility To Protect ◽  
Crimes Against Humanity ◽  
Military Coup ◽  
Cycle Of Violence ◽  
Special Issue ◽  
The Past ◽  
Atrocity Crimes ◽  
The Military

Abstract The case of Myanmar has become one of the most glaring examples for the failure of the international community to realise the promise made with the adoption of the responsibility to protect (R2P) norm in 2005: ‘Never again’ has turned into again and again. A mix of unwillingness and inability to prevent atrocity crimes has in Myanmar over the past ten years led to several instances of atrocity crimes and genocidal violence against the Rohingya. Most recently, the military coup of February 2021 has showcased that the notion of an international community exercising a responsibility to protect the population of Myanmar against crimes against humanity and other atrocity crimes dissembles into a few states openly shielding the perpetrators, a few condemning and countering the newest cycle of violence, and many silent bystanders to the ongoing atrocities. This article discusses the role of the R2P norm in the case of Myanmar and introduces the different contributions that comprise the special issue on Myanmar and the failure of R2P.

Introduction

2019 ◽  
pp. 1-12
Author(s):  
Richard Beardsworth ◽  
Garrett Wallace Brown ◽  
Richard Shapcott
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
International Politics ◽  
International Community ◽  
First Century ◽  
Responsibility To Protect ◽  
Mass Atrocity ◽  
International Responsibility ◽  
Twenty First Century ◽  
Atrocity Crimes ◽  
Political Vocabulary

The twenty-first century saw the emergence of a new doctrine of state and international responsibility in the form of the Responsibility to Protect (R2P). This doctrine transforms, in principle, the moral and political vocabulary of international politics from one of traditional definitions of state and human rights to a broadened normative understanding of domestic and global responsibilities. The doctrine stipulates that states individually and collectively have responsibilities to protect their citizens and those of other states from mass atrocity crimes. In using this language the international community has formalized the idea that states, in addition to their rights, have responsibilities that are essentially cosmopolitan in that they are owed to people everywhere....

The Failure to Protect in Myanmar: A Reflection on National Protection of Rohingya against Mass Atrocity Crimes and Prospects for the Responsibility to Protect

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-8
Author(s):  
Nickey Diamond
Keyword(s):  
Minority Groups ◽  
Military Intervention ◽  
Political Leadership ◽  
Responsibility To Protect ◽  
Central Component ◽  
Ethnic Minority Groups ◽  
Mass Atrocity ◽  
Failure To Protect ◽  
Atrocity Crimes ◽  
The Military

Abstract Impunity has been a major cause of the atrocity crimes committed by the Myanmar military, and accountability is generally seen as a central component of R2P. This article traces the changes of attitudes towards R2P-related measures in Myanmar. After 2017, voices gradually emerged from within Myanmar civil society in support of R2P, influenced by international efforts to ensure accountability and documentation. However, this support mostly came from ethnic minority groups. In the broader population and political leadership, calls for R2P were met with general hostility. Since the February 2021 coup, there has been a dramatic change of attitudes towards R2P, at least within the protest movement. However, the growing calls for R2P often reflect a desire for international military intervention that is unlikely to happen. Moreover, domestic efforts to hold the military accountable are now even more unlikely. International action to push for accountability is therefore still needed.

scholarly journals UN Peacekeeping, Responsibility to Protect and Humanitarian Intervention

2020 ◽  
Vol 76 (1) ◽  
pp. 120-135
Author(s):  
S. Krishnan
Keyword(s):  
Use Of Force ◽  
International Community ◽  
Responsibility To Protect ◽  
Military Force ◽  
Peacekeeping Operations ◽  
Un Peacekeeping ◽  
Mass Atrocity ◽  
The Government ◽  
Atrocity Crimes ◽  
Armed Intervention

The question of armed intervention on behalf of the international community, in the internal affairs of a state against the wishes of the government of that state, in order to prevent widespread death or suffering among the population, is not a new one. Indeed Imperial Rome grappled with the same problems in Dalmatia and Judaea 2,000 years ago, as the international community does in those same regions today. How effective are peacekeeping operations in preventing and stopping violence? Is there an alternative to United Nations (UN) and regional peacekeeping operations? The practice of UN peacekeeping is evolving in many instances into robust peacemaking actions with a positive responsibility to protect (R2P) civilians within the field of operations. The R2P (and ‘responsibility while protecting’ (RwP)) concept sets out a key principle to enable the international community to prevent atrocity crimes. Since its emergence, however, there have been intense discussions over how to put the principle into practice. Some aspects of the concept remainf unclear, including how to undertake, as the last resort, the use of military force. These issues must be considered within the boundaries set by R2P which seek at all costs to avoid the use of force for other reasons than ceasing mass atrocity crimes. The use of force, therefore – including possible military action by the international community, given growing international reluctance to accept grave threats to peace and security, including mass crimes against defenceless populations – has to be thoroughly analysed and comprehended. This article presents an analysis of the development of civilian peacekeeping, its relevance in the field of conflict resolution and its autonomy from multidimensional peacekeeping, championed by the UN.

Responsibility to Protect in International Criminal Law

Postgenocide ◽  
2021 ◽  
pp. 112-134
Author(s):  
Jobair Alam
Keyword(s):  
Criminal Law ◽  
International Criminal ◽  
Minority Group ◽  
Responsibility To Protect ◽  
International Criminal Law ◽  
National Politics ◽  
Mass Atrocity ◽  
Jus Cogens ◽  
Atrocity Crimes ◽  
Normative Foundations

This chapter considers the worst contemporary state-led prosecution of a minority group, which amounts to genocide, namely the Rohingya. It examines the atrocity crimes committed against them under international criminal law (ICL) and the application of Responsibility to Protect (R2P) thereupon. It suggests that such atrocities are constitutive of violations of jus cogens which warrants obligatio erga omnes. Accordingly, the perpetrators can be brought to justice under inter/national and universal jurisdictions, which, nonetheless, has not yet occurred. Given the failure of ICL mechanisms, the normative foundations of the R2P can provide valuable tools for intercepting mass atrocity crimes. The Rohingya—who face direct and structural violence at the hands of the Myanmar state—need protection from these crimes. The chapter explains how insular national politics can undo the gains made by the international community in upholding the distinctiveness of humanitarian claims through the application of the R2P.

The Responsibility to Protect and Obama’s Red Line on Syria

2016 ◽  
Vol 8 (1) ◽  
pp. 76-101 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yasmine Nahlawi
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
The United States ◽  
Responsibility To Protect ◽  
Chemical Weapons ◽  
Legal Basis ◽  
Chemical Attack ◽  
Mass Atrocity ◽  
Atrocity Crimes ◽  
Syrian Conflict ◽  
Red Line

The 21 August 2013 chemical attack on Ghouta led to the mobilisation of the international community after long international paralysis towards the ongoing conflict in Syria. It is unclear, however, why or under what legal basis states chose to react to Syria’s use of chemical weapons in exclusion to other mass atrocity crimes committed within the country. This article evaluates the legal underpinnings of President Obama’s ‘red line’ on the use of chemical weapons in Syria in the context of R2P. It notes that while all states condemned the Ghouta attack and called for accountability in this regard, only a minority of states shared the United States’ position that chemical weapons constituted a red line in their own right. Overall, it is maintained that the ‘red line’ phenomenon was case-specific to the Syrian conflict, reflecting geopolitical interests of world powers rather than signifying a new precedent for R2P’s application.

Why ‘Never Again’ and R2P Did Not Work in Myanmar

2021 ◽  
pp. 1-5
Author(s):  
Ivan Šimonović
Keyword(s):  
Human Rights ◽  
Personal Experience ◽  
International Community ◽  
Secretary General ◽  
Responsibility To Protect ◽  
The Future ◽  
Atrocity Crimes

Abstract This intervention discusses the reasons why the international community failed to prevent atrocity crimes against the Rohingyas in Myanmar. It draws on the author’s personal experience as UN Assistant Secretary-General for Human Rights from 2010 to 2016 and Special Adviser of the Secretary-General on the Responsibility to Protect from 2016 to 2018. It lays out five major ingredients of the failure to prevent atrocities in Myanmar and identifies three key lessons that must be learned to avoid continued failures into the future.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document