东盟与若开邦危机:在应对缅甸暴行中平衡不干涉、问责和战略利益

IF 0.8 Q3 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS Global Responsibility to Protect Pub Date : 2021-03-01 DOI:10.1163/1875-984X-13020003
Noel M. Morada
{"title":"东盟与若开邦危机:在应对缅甸暴行中平衡不干涉、问责和战略利益","authors":"Noel M. Morada","doi":"10.1163/1875-984X-13020003","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nasean has not collectively responded to the Rakhine crisis since 2017 from the perspective of the Responsibility to Protect (R2P) principle and has failed to put a stop to the atrocities against the Rohingyas in Myanmar. This article argues that there is less support in the region for invoking the non-interference principle in dealing with Myanmar on the Rohingya issue even as some members have called for its relaxation and use of constructive engagement instead. As international pressure in pursuit of justice and accountability increased, so did calls from within the region for asean to do more beyond just providing humanitarian assistance to affected communities in Rakhine. Even so, asean consciously avoids pressing too hard on the issue of accountability as this could force the government and the military in Myanmar to totally disengage with asean and the international community on the Rakhine crisis, as well as push Nay Pyi Daw further into China’s embrace and thus undermine asean’s strategic interests in the region.","PeriodicalId":38207,"journal":{"name":"Global Responsibility to Protect","volume":"8 1","pages":"1-27"},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2021-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"asean and the Rakhine Crisis: Balancing Non-interference, Accountability, and Strategic Interests in Responding to Atrocities in Myanmar\",\"authors\":\"Noel M. Morada\",\"doi\":\"10.1163/1875-984X-13020003\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"\\nasean has not collectively responded to the Rakhine crisis since 2017 from the perspective of the Responsibility to Protect (R2P) principle and has failed to put a stop to the atrocities against the Rohingyas in Myanmar. This article argues that there is less support in the region for invoking the non-interference principle in dealing with Myanmar on the Rohingya issue even as some members have called for its relaxation and use of constructive engagement instead. As international pressure in pursuit of justice and accountability increased, so did calls from within the region for asean to do more beyond just providing humanitarian assistance to affected communities in Rakhine. Even so, asean consciously avoids pressing too hard on the issue of accountability as this could force the government and the military in Myanmar to totally disengage with asean and the international community on the Rakhine crisis, as well as push Nay Pyi Daw further into China’s embrace and thus undermine asean’s strategic interests in the region.\",\"PeriodicalId\":38207,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Global Responsibility to Protect\",\"volume\":\"8 1\",\"pages\":\"1-27\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2021-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Global Responsibility to Protect\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1163/1875-984X-13020003\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Global Responsibility to Protect","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/1875-984X-13020003","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

自2017年以来,东盟一直没有从“保护责任”原则的角度对若开邦危机作出集体反应,也未能制止缅甸对罗兴亚人的暴行。本文认为,该地区在处理罗兴亚问题时援引不干涉原则的支持较少,尽管一些成员国呼吁放松这一原则,转而采用建设性接触。随着追求正义和问责制的国际压力增加,该地区内部也呼吁东盟采取更多行动,而不仅仅是向若开邦受影响的社区提供人道主义援助。即便如此,东盟也有意识地避免在问责问题上过于施压,因为这可能迫使缅甸政府和军方在若开邦危机上与东盟和国际社会完全脱离关系,并将内比都进一步推向中国的怀抱,从而损害东盟在该地区的战略利益。
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
asean and the Rakhine Crisis: Balancing Non-interference, Accountability, and Strategic Interests in Responding to Atrocities in Myanmar
asean has not collectively responded to the Rakhine crisis since 2017 from the perspective of the Responsibility to Protect (R2P) principle and has failed to put a stop to the atrocities against the Rohingyas in Myanmar. This article argues that there is less support in the region for invoking the non-interference principle in dealing with Myanmar on the Rohingya issue even as some members have called for its relaxation and use of constructive engagement instead. As international pressure in pursuit of justice and accountability increased, so did calls from within the region for asean to do more beyond just providing humanitarian assistance to affected communities in Rakhine. Even so, asean consciously avoids pressing too hard on the issue of accountability as this could force the government and the military in Myanmar to totally disengage with asean and the international community on the Rakhine crisis, as well as push Nay Pyi Daw further into China’s embrace and thus undermine asean’s strategic interests in the region.
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
Global Responsibility to Protect
Global Responsibility to Protect Social Sciences-Political Science and International Relations
CiteScore
2.40
自引率
44.40%
发文量
42
期刊最新文献
The Responsibility to Protect: a Bibliography Residual Responsibility to Implement: the AU, the Constitutive Act, and the Responsibility to Protect Notes on Contributors China and Intervention at the UN Security Council: Reconciling Status, written by Courtney J. Fung Beyond the Responsibility to Protect in International Law: An Ethics of Irresponsibility, written by Angeliki Samara
×
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