Consequentialism – Deontology Theorising, Armed Humanitarian Intervention, and the 2012-2013 Central African Republic Crisis

Abstract

Despite the challenges that have greeted Responsibility to Protect (R2P) interventions in Africa, the need to authorise R2P remains compelling. Drawing from secondary sources, this study interrogates the R2P intervention in the Central African Republic (car) from within the frame of the ‘consequentialism’ and ‘deontology’ debate, contending issues, and the extent to which such interventions enhance or inhibit further institutionalisation of the doctrine. Though the existing peacekeeping mission – which was further amplified by the mobilisation of R2P via UN Security Council Resolution 2127 – reflects the deontological position of halting attacks against the civilian population, the emerging issues and relapse into deadly conflicts in the post-intervention era amplifies consequentialism’s main criticisms. The study concludes that the R2P experience in car highlights the value of both theoretical positions. However, it is imperative for the consequentialist position to strengthen its arguments for civilian protection by considering the moral argument of the deontologist. This is key to improving armed intervention through the phases of planning, implementation, and post-intervention for the purposes of achieving sustainable peace.