Pub Date : 2022-09-07DOI: 10.1163/1875984x-20220016
Ferdinand Mbirigi
The state’s responsibility to protect is one of the well-established principles of international law recalled by the Resolution a/res/60/1 of 16 September 2005. Given the controversies surrounding the scope of the principle, this paper analyses the practice of its implementation with a particular focus on Burundi which withdrew from the 1998 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court on 27 October 2017. The reflection consisted in collecting and analysing previous academic works and official documents inter alia national laws, international instruments, official statements, reports, and records of meeting on the responsibility to protect and related topics. The paper demonstrates that Burundi has made progress to build the state’s resilience to atrocity crimes by establishing a deterrent legal framework and institutional mechanisms. Nonetheless, these significant efforts failed to achieve the expected outcomes in terms of legal effect.
{"title":"Assurance for Implementing the State’s Responsibility to Protect: Lessons from Burundian Practice","authors":"Ferdinand Mbirigi","doi":"10.1163/1875984x-20220016","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/1875984x-20220016","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000The state’s responsibility to protect is one of the well-established principles of international law recalled by the Resolution a/res/60/1 of 16 September 2005. Given the controversies surrounding the scope of the principle, this paper analyses the practice of its implementation with a particular focus on Burundi which withdrew from the 1998 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court on 27 October 2017. The reflection consisted in collecting and analysing previous academic works and official documents inter alia national laws, international instruments, official statements, reports, and records of meeting on the responsibility to protect and related topics. The paper demonstrates that Burundi has made progress to build the state’s resilience to atrocity crimes by establishing a deterrent legal framework and institutional mechanisms. Nonetheless, these significant efforts failed to achieve the expected outcomes in terms of legal effect.","PeriodicalId":38207,"journal":{"name":"Global Responsibility to Protect","volume":"67 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2022-09-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"72779527","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-08-22DOI: 10.1163/1875984x-20220013
N. Erameh, V. Ojakorotu
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.
{"title":"Consequentialism – Deontology Theorising, Armed Humanitarian Intervention, and the 2012-2013 Central African Republic Crisis","authors":"N. Erameh, V. Ojakorotu","doi":"10.1163/1875984x-20220013","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/1875984x-20220013","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000Despite 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.","PeriodicalId":38207,"journal":{"name":"Global Responsibility to Protect","volume":"11 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2022-08-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"81946364","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-08-11DOI: 10.1163/1875984x-14030003
Stacey Henderson, Leon Muller
This article critically examines the pluralistic legal environment of Afghanistan, security sector reform processes engaged in by the international community, and the dismissal of the practice of bacha bazi as a cultural issue, which combined to allow the sexual abuse and exploitation of young boys to continue with impunity. The article calls for the United Nations and the international community to show strong, ethical, and transparent leadership on child protection within future mission mandates as a practical implementation of the secondary duty under the responsibility to protect (R2P).
{"title":"Afghanistan’s Forgotten Boys: Legal Pluralism and Impunity","authors":"Stacey Henderson, Leon Muller","doi":"10.1163/1875984x-14030003","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/1875984x-14030003","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000This article critically examines the pluralistic legal environment of Afghanistan, security sector reform processes engaged in by the international community, and the dismissal of the practice of bacha bazi as a cultural issue, which combined to allow the sexual abuse and exploitation of young boys to continue with impunity. The article calls for the United Nations and the international community to show strong, ethical, and transparent leadership on child protection within future mission mandates as a practical implementation of the secondary duty under the responsibility to protect (R2P).","PeriodicalId":38207,"journal":{"name":"Global Responsibility to Protect","volume":"16 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2022-08-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"73716792","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-08-02DOI: 10.1163/1875984x-20220014
Maria Tanyag
When and why do state responses to crises such as the covid-19 pandemic embody hypermasculinity? How does state hypermasculinity contribute to mortality during a pandemic? This article examines state hypermasculinity as a main atrocity risk factor and as a root cause of preventable deaths arising from failures in pandemic response. It focuses on the case of the Philippines under the leadership of President Rodrigo Duterte to build on feminist scholarship examining gender, crises, and the rise of ‘strongman’ leaders globally. It argues that a state’s predisposition for violence and atrocity crimes renders disease outbreaks more deadly. Significant loss of life and livelihoods during the pandemic are logical outcomes of state structures and responses that combine militarised security, paternalism, and domination of feminised ‘others’. Crucially, the implications of state hypermasculinity extend beyond pandemics as it is clearly emerging as a vector for compounded human insecurities at a time of multiple and overlapping crises.
{"title":"A Murderous Plague: State Hypermasculinity, covid-19, and Atrocity Prevention in the Philippines","authors":"Maria Tanyag","doi":"10.1163/1875984x-20220014","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/1875984x-20220014","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000When and why do state responses to crises such as the covid-19 pandemic embody hypermasculinity? How does state hypermasculinity contribute to mortality during a pandemic? This article examines state hypermasculinity as a main atrocity risk factor and as a root cause of preventable deaths arising from failures in pandemic response. It focuses on the case of the Philippines under the leadership of President Rodrigo Duterte to build on feminist scholarship examining gender, crises, and the rise of ‘strongman’ leaders globally. It argues that a state’s predisposition for violence and atrocity crimes renders disease outbreaks more deadly. Significant loss of life and livelihoods during the pandemic are logical outcomes of state structures and responses that combine militarised security, paternalism, and domination of feminised ‘others’. Crucially, the implications of state hypermasculinity extend beyond pandemics as it is clearly emerging as a vector for compounded human insecurities at a time of multiple and overlapping crises.","PeriodicalId":38207,"journal":{"name":"Global Responsibility to Protect","volume":"67 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2022-08-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"82486618","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-07-21DOI: 10.1163/1875984x-20220012
B. Howe
Many states in the East Asian region (including Northeast and Southeast subregions) are moving away from traditional state-centric governance notions towards accepting a localised variant of ‘sovereignty as responsibility’ that allows for criticism of domestic policies and limited diplomatic pressure in the event of humanitarian crises. There has been acceptance of the cosmopolitan governance principles of human security and the Responsibility to Protect (R2P). Despite convergence on the R2P however, East Asian states maintain a pluralistic understanding of what it implies and its relationship with human security. Furthermore, refugees form one of the most vulnerable groups in the region precisely because of an ongoing resistance in recognising responsibility for their protection. This paper addresses the performance of different agencies of governance (at the national and international level) in fulfilling their R2P obligations towards North Korean refugees and the Rohingya, the two most prominent (and controversial) regional refugee groups.
{"title":"Whose Responsibility? The Protection of Refugees in East Asia","authors":"B. Howe","doi":"10.1163/1875984x-20220012","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/1875984x-20220012","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000Many states in the East Asian region (including Northeast and Southeast subregions) are moving away from traditional state-centric governance notions towards accepting a localised variant of ‘sovereignty as responsibility’ that allows for criticism of domestic policies and limited diplomatic pressure in the event of humanitarian crises. There has been acceptance of the cosmopolitan governance principles of human security and the Responsibility to Protect (R2P). Despite convergence on the R2P however, East Asian states maintain a pluralistic understanding of what it implies and its relationship with human security. Furthermore, refugees form one of the most vulnerable groups in the region precisely because of an ongoing resistance in recognising responsibility for their protection. This paper addresses the performance of different agencies of governance (at the national and international level) in fulfilling their R2P obligations towards North Korean refugees and the Rohingya, the two most prominent (and controversial) regional refugee groups.","PeriodicalId":38207,"journal":{"name":"Global Responsibility to Protect","volume":"53 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2022-07-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"73385299","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-07-11DOI: 10.1163/1875-984x-14030002
Thomas Peak, Charlie Laderman, Cecilia Jacob
This short article introduces the Special Issue on Intervention and the Responsibility to Protect. The purpose of this special issue is to prompt a conversation across historical and contemporary approaches, with a global perspective, to the question of intervention. It considers how the past informs the present and reflects on multiple ‘futures’ of intervention in the context of R2P.
{"title":"Intervention and the Responsibility to Protect: Past, Present, and Futures","authors":"Thomas Peak, Charlie Laderman, Cecilia Jacob","doi":"10.1163/1875-984x-14030002","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/1875-984x-14030002","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000This short article introduces the Special Issue on Intervention and the Responsibility to Protect. The purpose of this special issue is to prompt a conversation across historical and contemporary approaches, with a global perspective, to the question of intervention. It considers how the past informs the present and reflects on multiple ‘futures’ of intervention in the context of R2P.","PeriodicalId":38207,"journal":{"name":"Global Responsibility to Protect","volume":"39 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2022-07-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"87866348","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-06-29DOI: 10.1163/1875-984x-20220011
A. Bellamy
This piece examines the place of the use of force in R2P. It shows that a sceptical view about the use of force to protect populations, a view guided by the seemingly ‘endless wars’ of the global ‘war on terror’ and the troubled legacy of intervention in Libya, has become predominant. The principle’s earliest advocates went to considerable lengths to distinguish it from the bad old days of ‘humanitarian intervention’ in part to assuage fears and in part to burnish R2P’s apparent novelty. However, experience shows that in the face of determined perpetrators force, with all the problems that entails, sometimes is necessary to protect from populations. This piece suggests the need to bring the use of force back in to debates about implementing R2P
{"title":"R2P and the Use of Force","authors":"A. Bellamy","doi":"10.1163/1875-984x-20220011","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/1875-984x-20220011","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000This piece examines the place of the use of force in R2P. It shows that a sceptical view about the use of force to protect populations, a view guided by the seemingly ‘endless wars’ of the global ‘war on terror’ and the troubled legacy of intervention in Libya, has become predominant. The principle’s earliest advocates went to considerable lengths to distinguish it from the bad old days of ‘humanitarian intervention’ in part to assuage fears and in part to burnish R2P’s apparent novelty. However, experience shows that in the face of determined perpetrators force, with all the problems that entails, sometimes is necessary to protect from populations. This piece suggests the need to bring the use of force back in to debates about implementing R2P","PeriodicalId":38207,"journal":{"name":"Global Responsibility to Protect","volume":"10 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2022-06-29","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"84809984","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-06-06DOI: 10.1163/1875-984x-20220009
Anastasia Prokhorova
How does the Special Adviser decide to call for the ‘responsibility to protect’ populations from atrocities? How have different postholders understood and shaped their role in practice? This article examines the ‘performative leadership’ of the Special Adviser of the United Nations Secretary-General on the Responsibility to Protect (R2P). In contrast to the dominant approach informed by conventional models of norm diffusion, this research develops a framework which connects strategic norm-building with symbolic interaction and performativity. Given this, I argue that the postholders do not merely enact institutional scripts but ‘perform’ certain meanings of R2P, both creatively and strategically, while being deeply situated in a rigid environment with existing rules. This study brings to the fore subtle yet deep-seated contestations around R2P, which become visible with the inclusion of the Special Adviser. Methodologically, this article relies on interpretative discourse analysis of the representations of the advisers’ creative choices regarding their performances.
{"title":"The Special Adviser on the Responsibility to Protect: Performing Norm Leadership","authors":"Anastasia Prokhorova","doi":"10.1163/1875-984x-20220009","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/1875-984x-20220009","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000How does the Special Adviser decide to call for the ‘responsibility to protect’ populations from atrocities? How have different postholders understood and shaped their role in practice? This article examines the ‘performative leadership’ of the Special Adviser of the United Nations Secretary-General on the Responsibility to Protect (R2P). In contrast to the dominant approach informed by conventional models of norm diffusion, this research develops a framework which connects strategic norm-building with symbolic interaction and performativity. Given this, I argue that the postholders do not merely enact institutional scripts but ‘perform’ certain meanings of R2P, both creatively and strategically, while being deeply situated in a rigid environment with existing rules. This study brings to the fore subtle yet deep-seated contestations around R2P, which become visible with the inclusion of the Special Adviser. Methodologically, this article relies on interpretative discourse analysis of the representations of the advisers’ creative choices regarding their performances.","PeriodicalId":38207,"journal":{"name":"Global Responsibility to Protect","volume":"78 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2022-06-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"75671889","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-06-01DOI: 10.1163/1875-984x-20220010
P. Wight, Yuriko Cowper-Smith
By combining insights from the three dominant perspectives in International Relations – liberalism, realism, and anti-imperialism – a novel approach is put forward, that of ‘harm mitigation’. A comparative analysis of Ethiopia and Myanmar reveals that the international community still does not possess the mechanisms to halt mass atrocities in real time. When enforcing R2P, none of the available non-coercive and coercive policy options are pragmatically or ethically unassailable. The non-coercive tools that can be labelled as ‘ethical’, such as diplomacy, humanitarian assistance, and documenting atrocities, while important, are largely ineffective at stopping atrocities as they happen. Much like UN peacekeeping, these non-coercive actions are limited by targeted governments invoking the principle of state sovereignty. Meanwhile, actions that are potentially expedient, such as economic sanctions, military intervention, and supporting rebel groups, are ethically thorny. The conclusions speak to the reality that both non-intervention and intervention have the potential to cause human suffering.
{"title":"Mass Atrocities in Ethiopia and Myanmar: The Case for ‘Harm Mitigation’ in R2P Implementation","authors":"P. Wight, Yuriko Cowper-Smith","doi":"10.1163/1875-984x-20220010","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/1875-984x-20220010","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000By combining insights from the three dominant perspectives in International Relations – liberalism, realism, and anti-imperialism – a novel approach is put forward, that of ‘harm mitigation’. A comparative analysis of Ethiopia and Myanmar reveals that the international community still does not possess the mechanisms to halt mass atrocities in real time. When enforcing R2P, none of the available non-coercive and coercive policy options are pragmatically or ethically unassailable. The non-coercive tools that can be labelled as ‘ethical’, such as diplomacy, humanitarian assistance, and documenting atrocities, while important, are largely ineffective at stopping atrocities as they happen. Much like UN peacekeeping, these non-coercive actions are limited by targeted governments invoking the principle of state sovereignty. Meanwhile, actions that are potentially expedient, such as economic sanctions, military intervention, and supporting rebel groups, are ethically thorny. The conclusions speak to the reality that both non-intervention and intervention have the potential to cause human suffering.","PeriodicalId":38207,"journal":{"name":"Global Responsibility to Protect","volume":"56 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2022-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"89317198","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
Pub Date : 2022-05-23DOI: 10.1163/1875-984x-20220008
Karen R. Smith
The current discussion on R2P at the UN is largely ahistorical or at most informed by selective historical references, which exclude earlier forms of intervention aimed at atrocity prevention, particularly by states in the global South. This contribution argues that the result is a skewed understanding of the practice of intervention that serves to deny agency to actors outside of the West and undermines the framing of atrocity prevention and R2P as an issue of global concern.
{"title":"R2P at the UN: the Problem of Selective History and Incomplete Narratives","authors":"Karen R. Smith","doi":"10.1163/1875-984x-20220008","DOIUrl":"https://doi.org/10.1163/1875-984x-20220008","url":null,"abstract":"\u0000The current discussion on R2P at the UN is largely ahistorical or at most informed by selective historical references, which exclude earlier forms of intervention aimed at atrocity prevention, particularly by states in the global South. This contribution argues that the result is a skewed understanding of the practice of intervention that serves to deny agency to actors outside of the West and undermines the framing of atrocity prevention and R2P as an issue of global concern.","PeriodicalId":38207,"journal":{"name":"Global Responsibility to Protect","volume":"77 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.9,"publicationDate":"2022-05-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":null,"resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":"72966778","PeriodicalName":null,"FirstCategoryId":null,"ListUrlMain":null,"RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":"","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":"","EPubDate":null,"PubModel":null,"JCR":null,"JCRName":null,"Score":null,"Total":0}
京公网安备 11010802042870号
京ICP备2023020795号-1
扫码关注我们
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：