The Responsibility to ProtectChapters 1 & 2

Melissa Iraha and Shiori Kawata

CHAPTER 1: THE POLICY CHALLENGE

Chapter 1 Outline• The Intervention Dilemma• The Changing International

Environment• The Implications for State

Sovereignty• The Meaning of Intervention

The Intervention Dilemma• Inaction…..ex. Rwanda case reflects

the lack of interest of the international community

• Action…ex. Kosovo case questions the legitimacy of intervention

ex. Bosnia & Somalia cases failed to keep a promise to protect lives

Either way entails consequences and controversy

The Intervention Dilemma

• Different positions in the debate over intervention has divided the international community

• A common ground must be found to effectively respond to those in need of help

• Sept. 2000, Canada government announced the establishment of the ICISS

The Intervention Dilemma

• ICISS (International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty)

• Objective: to develop a political consensus on the process from discussion to action, esp. in the UN.

• Membership: reflect diverse perspectives• Encourage the UN to meet a consensus• Nov. 2000, commission meets for the first time

in Ottawa– Work process “transparent, inclusive, and global”– Establishment of a research directorate– Regional roundtables and national consultations

(sec.1.9)

The Changing International Environment

• The types of national and international affairs have changed– ex. the war against terrorism

• Current international institutions are out of date– New actors– New security issues– New demands and expectations– New opportunities for common action

The Changing International Environment- New Actors -

• 51 (1945) to 189 (2000) UN member states…today 193 (2011)

• Institutional actors concerning human rights and human security– OHCHR, UNHCR,ICRC…etc.

• Non-state actors– NGOs, media and academics, armed non-state

actors• Wider views, new perspectives and

increased awarenessNo longer only interstate

The Changing International Environment

- New Security Issues -• Domestic armed conflicts• Competition over resources• Proliferation of cheap and highly destructive

weapons• Increased civilian casualties

Often seen as intrastate conflicts• Developed states are deeply involved in these

domestic conflicts that seem distant– ex. colonial remnants, weapons,…etc

• International “security depends on a framework of stable sovereign entities” Implies the responsibility of the international community to

be actively engaged in nation-building

The Changing International Environment

- New Security Issues -• Current UN peacekeeping strategies

designed for interstate conflicts and ceasefires must be updated

• Military intervention that can guarantee the protection of civilians is necessary– Proportionality shouldn’t be too less or too much

• Consistent responses to all serious humanitarian crises (regardless of location, severity, interests)

The Changing International Environment

- New Demands and Expectations -• Norms and mechanisms which protect human rights

– Progress in its international recognition (sec.1.25)• New international institutions and NGOs concerning

protection of human rights new expectations for conduct and corrective action

• The expansion of the concept of security extending to people, not only states– “there is growing recognition worldwide that the protection of

human security…..must be one of the fundamental objectives of modern international institutions.”

• Information technology raised awareness of geographically distant conflicts, esp. through visual media

The Changing International Environment-New Opportunities for Common Action-

• The prospect of the Security Council fulfilling its role in maintaining international peace and security– Has the “capacity” for common actionToo optimistic? bureaucratic and political

impediments…• Globalization and interdependency

induce neighboring states to be engaged in regions with conflicts

The Implications of State Sovereignty

• Sovereignty is the best line of defense for many states…but also

“a recognition of their equal worth and dignity, a protection of their unique identities and their identities and their national freedom, and an affirmation of their right to shape and determine their own destiny”

• Many new states are in the process of establishing their identities– International law constrains states on how they should

treat their citizens– New actors taking part in international roles that were

once states’ responsibility

The Implications of State Sovereignty

• But sovereignty still matters– States are the best entity that can effectively

benefit from the participation in globalization via trade, communication…etc, and gain international respect in terms of human rights

– Confident, independent states can help maintain security through cooperation

• Sovereignty implies Dual responsibility:– External…respecting sovereignty over other

states– Internal…respecting the rights of citizens of

own state

The Meaning of Intervention

• Debate over definition of “intervention”• Intervention(R2P Report): action taken

against a state or its leaders, without its or their consent, for purposes which are claimed to be humanitarian or protective– Coercive measures• Preventive measures…measures taken to avoid

the need for military intervention• Reactive measures…alternative measures to

military force in addressing conflicts

The Meaning of Intervention

• Instead of “humanitarian intervention”“intervention”, or “military

intervention”, for human protection• This is a response to opposition from

humanitarian organization concerning the use of the word “humanitarian” in military terms

• Using the term “humanitarian intervention” can pre-justify its legitimacy

CHAPTER 2: A NEW APPROACH “ THE RESPONSIBILITY TO PROTECT”

Chapter 2. Outline• The Meaning of Sovereignty• Human Rights, Human Security and

Emerging Practices• Shifting the term of the debate

Situation in the world• Goal is to deliver practical protection for

ordinary people • Continuing fear about a “right to

intervene” concerning previous cases of intervention

• Development of consistent and enforceable standards to guide state by international community is necessary in order to justify intervention for humanitarian protection purposes

Needs for new approach to intervention on human

protection grounds• To establish clearer rules, procedures

and criteria• To establish the legitimacy of military

intervention• To ensure that military intervention is

effective• To help eliminate the causes of

conflict

Changing Language

• From “right to intervene” to “responsibility to protect”

• But without changing the substantive issues• Addressing all issues from new perspectives

concerning the “responsibility to protect”1. principles of the concept of sovereignty2. impact of principles of human rights and human security

The Meaning of Sovereignty

• Sovereignty:• The legal identity of a state in international

law• Has the capacity to make authoritative

decisions about people and resources in the state

• Has regulated authority internally by constitutional power sharing arrangement

• Has corresponding obligation to respect other state’s sovereignty

The Meaning of Sovereignty - Non-intervention -

• Duty not to intervene in the internal affairs of a sovereign state

• Victim state’s further right to defend• Right to self-defense• The norm of non-intervention has not

been undermined

The Meaning of Sovereignty- The organizing principle of

the UN system -• 3 goals of international collaborative

action①State-building②Nation-building③Economic development

• Majority of armed conflicts are not inter-state, but internal

• Sovereignty in the state, in the people, and in individuals

The Meaning of Sovereignty - Sovereignty as Responsibility - • From sovereignty as control to

sovereignty as responsibility• Responsible for

①Protecting the safety and lives of citizens②Citizens internally / international community③Action (accountability)

Human Rights, Human Security and Emerging

Practices-Human Rights-“Promoting and encouraging respect for human rights and for

fundamental freedoms for all without distinction to race, sex, language or religion”

• Civil-political, social-economic, cultural right• The Universal Declaration and the two

Covenants of 1966 established the benchmark for state conduct and national law

• From a culture of sovereign impunity to a culture of national and international accountability-to judge state conduct-to develop humanitarian law

Human Rights, Human Security and Emerging

Practices-Human Security-• Security of people

①physical, economic, social safety②respect for dignity and worth③protection of human right and freedom

• National security can be threatened not only by external aggression, but also by internal “security” forces

Human Rights, Human Security and Emerging

Practices-Shift in the Concept of

Security-• States must direct increased concern on domestic security of its citizens: from territorial security (security through armament) to environmental security (security with access to food and employment)

• A focus on fundamental security of ordinary people in their daily lives

Human Rights, Human Security and Emerging

Practices-Emerging Practice-• Debate on military intervention for human protection

purposes concerning the needs and distress in the real world and the systematic instruments and modalities for managing world order

• Due to the complexities of establishing a customary international law, there is an emerging guiding principle= “responsibility to protect” “Guiding” principle…how likely is it to be

implemented?• The scale of the crises helps interveners justify their

actions by claiming the possible threat to the international society…ex. Somalia, Kosovo…

• Military intervention for humanitarian protection can be legally justified based on UN Charter and other legal foundations

Shifting the Terms of the Debate

“Right to Intervene”①attention on claims,

right and prerogatives of intervening state

②the need for prior effort and follow up assistance

③in favor of intervention, sovereignty with intervention

“Responsible to protect”①from point of view of

those seeking or needing support

②primary responsibility with the state concerned

③responsibility to prevent, responsibility to react, and responsibility to rebuild

Shifting the Terms of the Debate

-Responsibility to Protect-• The domestic authority is the best placed to

prevent problems from turning into conflicts• If the state is unwilling or unable to take their

responsibility to protect, the boarder community of the states must take actionOn what standards does the international community

decide whether a state is unable to address its problems?

• To prevent, to react, and to rebuild are important• The focus of discussion is shifted to the people

who need or seek assistance

UN Response to the R2P• In 2005 UN World Summit, recognized 3 pillars of R2P:

– 1. State’s responsibility for its citizens– 2. International Community’s responsibility to assist 1. – 3. International Community’s responsibility to protect populations from

humanitarian crimes• A new joint office of Special Adviser on the Prevention of Genocide

and Special Adviser on the Responsibility to Protect in 2007• Security General’s report and General Assembly in 2009 for

continued consideration of the implementation of R2P• 2010, Security General addresses consideration of improved

preventative mechanism in the UN• 2011, General Assembly mentions the role of regional and sub-

regional cooperation in implementation• 2012, Security General presented a need for a timely and decisive

response by the UN

Key Questions Can we be optimistic about the United

Nations Security Council fulfilling an efficient role in approaching future humanitarian crises?

On what standards does the international community decide whether a state is unable to address its problems?

How likely is it to be implemented? Will it only be referred to as a “guiding” standard?

References• The International Commission on Intervention and State

Sovereignty. The Responsibility to Protect. 2001• The International Commission on Intervention and State

Sovereignty. The Responsibility to Protect: Research, Bibliography, Background. 2001

• The Responsibility to Protect. City University of New York (CUNY). Retrieved 2012

• “Member States”. United Nations. Retrieved 2012 http://www.un.org/en/members/growth.shtml

• “Charter of the United Nations”. United Nations. Retrieved 2012 http://www.un.org/en/documents/charter/

• “The Responsibility to Protect”. United Nations. Retrieved 2012 http://www.un.org/en/preventgenocide/adviser/responsibility.shtml