“保护责任”的过去、现在和未来:一段坎坷的旅程

Q4 Social Sciences Janus.net Pub Date : 2017-11-01 DOI:10.26619/1647-7251.8.2.1
Vitor Fernandes
{"title":"“保护责任”的过去、现在和未来:一段坎坷的旅程","authors":"Vitor Fernandes","doi":"10.26619/1647-7251.8.2.1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The aim of this article is to study the “Responsibility to Protect”, its evolution since 2000 and what can be expected for its future. Concurrently, the paper takes into account the need to protect populations, victims of certain types of aggression and to preserve the international order. Major criticisms of this doctrine are highlighted, as well as some of its impacts on the international community and, significantly, some of the difficulties that have arisen during its development – a process that has been controversial and troubled. Some of the main risks and uncertainties that affect its future are investigated, considering that a set of emerging countries who do not agree with the Western liberal order intends to be more active in international affairs. The fundamental argument is that the future of this doctrine might continue to be troubled and full of uncertainties. Thus, for RtoP to evolve in a favourable way, it will be necessary, on the one hand, that the members of the Security Council of the United Nations engage in genuine multilateral cooperation in order to safeguard the changes taking place in the international order; and, on the other hand, that the States consider such crimes to be an essential issue of international security and part of their interests.","PeriodicalId":38150,"journal":{"name":"Janus.net","volume":"8 1","pages":"1-12"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2017-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Past, present and future of the “responsibility to protect”: a bumpy journey\",\"authors\":\"Vitor Fernandes\",\"doi\":\"10.26619/1647-7251.8.2.1\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The aim of this article is to study the “Responsibility to Protect”, its evolution since 2000 and what can be expected for its future. Concurrently, the paper takes into account the need to protect populations, victims of certain types of aggression and to preserve the international order. Major criticisms of this doctrine are highlighted, as well as some of its impacts on the international community and, significantly, some of the difficulties that have arisen during its development – a process that has been controversial and troubled. Some of the main risks and uncertainties that affect its future are investigated, considering that a set of emerging countries who do not agree with the Western liberal order intends to be more active in international affairs. The fundamental argument is that the future of this doctrine might continue to be troubled and full of uncertainties. Thus, for RtoP to evolve in a favourable way, it will be necessary, on the one hand, that the members of the Security Council of the United Nations engage in genuine multilateral cooperation in order to safeguard the changes taking place in the international order; and, on the other hand, that the States consider such crimes to be an essential issue of international security and part of their interests.\",\"PeriodicalId\":38150,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Janus.net\",\"volume\":\"8 1\",\"pages\":\"1-12\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2017-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Janus.net\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.26619/1647-7251.8.2.1\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Janus.net","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.26619/1647-7251.8.2.1","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本文的目的是研究“保护责任”及其自2000年以来的演变以及对其未来的预期。同时,该文件考虑到保护人民、某些类型侵略的受害者和维护国际秩序的必要性。强调了对这一学说的主要批评,以及它对国际社会的一些影响,尤其是在其发展过程中出现的一些困难——这一过程一直存在争议和麻烦。考虑到一些不同意西方自由主义秩序的新兴国家打算在国际事务中更加积极,对影响其未来的一些主要风险和不确定性进行了调查。基本论点是,这一学说的未来可能会继续受到困扰,充满不确定性。因此,为了使《议事规则》以有利的方式发展,一方面,联合国安全理事会成员必须进行真正的多边合作,以保障国际秩序的变化;另一方面,各国认为这类罪行是国际安全的一个重要问题,也是其利益的一部分。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Past, present and future of the “responsibility to protect”: a bumpy journey
The aim of this article is to study the “Responsibility to Protect”, its evolution since 2000 and what can be expected for its future. Concurrently, the paper takes into account the need to protect populations, victims of certain types of aggression and to preserve the international order. Major criticisms of this doctrine are highlighted, as well as some of its impacts on the international community and, significantly, some of the difficulties that have arisen during its development – a process that has been controversial and troubled. Some of the main risks and uncertainties that affect its future are investigated, considering that a set of emerging countries who do not agree with the Western liberal order intends to be more active in international affairs. The fundamental argument is that the future of this doctrine might continue to be troubled and full of uncertainties. Thus, for RtoP to evolve in a favourable way, it will be necessary, on the one hand, that the members of the Security Council of the United Nations engage in genuine multilateral cooperation in order to safeguard the changes taking place in the international order; and, on the other hand, that the States consider such crimes to be an essential issue of international security and part of their interests.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Janus.net
Janus.net Social Sciences-Law
CiteScore
0.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
8
审稿时长
18 weeks
期刊最新文献
China and European Union countries: Do Chinese partnerships boost cooperation results? EU-China relations: Exploring the possibility of cognitive dissonance It’s Not Venus, but Minerva: The European Quest for Relevance vis-à-vis the China Challenge Ukraine Geopolitical European Flashpoints vis-à-vis India and China: From Ambivalence to Strategic Engagement. Perspectives on The Suspension of the Eu-China Comprehensive Agreement on Investment.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1