... Whatever affects one directly, affects all indirectly." (MLK)
The international community strongly denounced the violence in Syria but so far it hasn’t been able to provide an effective framework to prevent and stop these atrocities. The responsibility to protect (R2P) doctrine - adopted in 2005 to embody the promises made by world leaders to prevent a future “Cambodia”, “Bosnia” and “Rwanda” - could neither prevent nor save Syria.
The humanitarian ...
... world arena and the only one that can provide the necessary legitimacy and authorization for military interventions. Though there are still cases where regional organizations such as NATO undertake their own independent military interventions, having United Nations authorization represents broad support and eliminates cases where the “responsibility to protect” rhetoric is used to cover up military intervention that does not serve humanitarian purposes.
The norm of the responsibility to protect was unanimously adopted by all UN Member States (Libya and Syria were among those ...
... voting on this resolution, which was adopted. During the operation the alliance then morphed the original mission of saving civilians into one of a bringing about a regime change. The operation in Libya thus exceeded its mandate and the norm of the responsibility to protect was damaged in the eyes of some nations, including China and Russia. This is partly responsible for the failure on the part of the Security Council to take any decisive actions on Syria – Russia now suspects Western nations ...
... with its massive crimes against humanity should be a perfect candidate for military intervention according to the norm of the responsibility to protect. It seems that a just cause is present, yet the international community is paralyzed with inaction.
... ....Resolution 912 (S/RES/912). 21 April 1994.
[2] U.N. Security Council. Report of the Independent Inquiry into the actions of the United Nations during the 1994 genocide in Rwanda (S/1999/1257).16 December 1999.
[3] U.N. Security Council. 6498 th meeting. ...
In my previous blog entry I talked about the politicized and selective approaches of UN Member States to making decision on intervention into intra-state conflicts. So, what could be the solution to this problem? What is needed to minimize the politicization? Clear criteria for military intervention should be defined in international law, so that when an intra-state conflict erupts, the international community, having timely assessed the conflict on the ground, could run through a checklist of those...
... within 3 days of adoption of resolution 1973. In this resolution the UN Security Council condemned war crimes and crimes against humanity in that country and authorized all necessary measures to protect civilians.
Thus, enshrined in the concept of responsibility to protect case by case basis of making decision on conducting military interventions encourages politicization and selective approach to conflicts.
The United Nations’ primary purpose is to serve the peoples of the world, and not to be a tool through which governments further their national interests. Decisions on military interventions made by the international community have always varied on ...
