叙利亚

Q4 Social Sciences Journal of International Peacekeeping Pub Date : 2021-12-16 DOI:10.1163/18754112-24030008
A. Bellamy
{"title":"叙利亚","authors":"A. Bellamy","doi":"10.1163/18754112-24030008","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nThe Syrian civil war stands as the most serious failure of the responsibility to prevent since the adoption of R2P in 2005. As the war has continued, there have been atrocities and abuse committed against vulnerable populations on a widespread and systematic scale. This article focuses on the atrocity prevention efforts undertaken in the first phase of the crisis from March 2011 to August 2012. It shows that while there were multiple tools utilized by a range of local, regional, and international actors, none of them had a lasting impact on the commission of atrocity crimes in Syria. This failure is due to five principal reasons. First, engagement to prevent atrocities came too late. Second, domestic and regional conditions were not conducive to prevention. Third, there was little reason for the warring parties to compromise. Fourth, there was a disconnect between what Western states wanted to achieve in Syria and what they were prepared to do about it. And fifth, the UN’s envoys had limited options for engagement.","PeriodicalId":38927,"journal":{"name":"Journal of International Peacekeeping","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-12-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Syria\",\"authors\":\"A. Bellamy\",\"doi\":\"10.1163/18754112-24030008\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\nThe Syrian civil war stands as the most serious failure of the responsibility to prevent since the adoption of R2P in 2005. As the war has continued, there have been atrocities and abuse committed against vulnerable populations on a widespread and systematic scale. This article focuses on the atrocity prevention efforts undertaken in the first phase of the crisis from March 2011 to August 2012. It shows that while there were multiple tools utilized by a range of local, regional, and international actors, none of them had a lasting impact on the commission of atrocity crimes in Syria. This failure is due to five principal reasons. First, engagement to prevent atrocities came too late. Second, domestic and regional conditions were not conducive to prevention. Third, there was little reason for the warring parties to compromise. Fourth, there was a disconnect between what Western states wanted to achieve in Syria and what they were prepared to do about it. And fifth, the UN’s envoys had limited options for engagement.\",\"PeriodicalId\":38927,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of International Peacekeeping\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-12-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of International Peacekeeping\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1163/18754112-24030008\",\"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":"Journal of International Peacekeeping","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/18754112-24030008","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

叙利亚内战是自2005年通过保护责任以来最严重的预防责任失败。随着战争的持续,针对弱势群体的暴行和虐待行为广泛而系统地发生。本文重点介绍2011年3月至2012年8月危机第一阶段所做的暴行预防工作。它表明,尽管一系列地方、区域和国际行为者使用了多种工具,但没有一种对叙利亚境内的暴行犯罪产生持久影响。这次失败主要有五个原因。首先,参与防止暴行来得太晚了。第二,国内和区域条件不利于预防。第三,交战各方几乎没有理由妥协。第四,西方国家希望在叙利亚实现的目标与他们准备采取的行动之间存在脱节。第五,联合国特使的参与选择有限。
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
Syria
The Syrian civil war stands as the most serious failure of the responsibility to prevent since the adoption of R2P in 2005. As the war has continued, there have been atrocities and abuse committed against vulnerable populations on a widespread and systematic scale. This article focuses on the atrocity prevention efforts undertaken in the first phase of the crisis from March 2011 to August 2012. It shows that while there were multiple tools utilized by a range of local, regional, and international actors, none of them had a lasting impact on the commission of atrocity crimes in Syria. This failure is due to five principal reasons. First, engagement to prevent atrocities came too late. Second, domestic and regional conditions were not conducive to prevention. Third, there was little reason for the warring parties to compromise. Fourth, there was a disconnect between what Western states wanted to achieve in Syria and what they were prepared to do about it. And fifth, the UN’s envoys had limited options for engagement.
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
Journal of International Peacekeeping
Journal of International Peacekeeping Medicine-Infectious Diseases
CiteScore
0.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
13
期刊最新文献
Safeguarding Freedom of Religion or Belief to Prevent Conflicts and Mass Atrocities in Southeast Asia: the Role of Parliamentarians The Civil Society-Military Interface in the Protection of Civilians: the Bangsamoro Case Re-imagining asean and the Quest for Peace: Challenges and Prospects for Peacebuilding, Conflict Prevention, and Atrocities Prevention Conflict Management and Atrocity Prevention in Southeast Asia: Making asean “Fit for Purpose” Responding to Atrocities in Myanmar after the February 2021 Coup: Options for asean beyond Normative and Structural Constraints
×
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