The Responsibility to Protect Chapters 1 & 2

The Responsibility to ProtectChapters 1 & 2 Melissa Iraha and ShioriKawata

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 the war against terrorism • Current international institutions are out of date • New actors • New security issues • New demands and expectations • New opportunities for common action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 awareness • No 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 action • Too 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 sovereignty 2. 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 action ①State-building ②Nation-building ③Economic 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 citizens ②Citizens internally / international community ③Action (accountability)

Human Rights, Human Security and Emerging Practices-Human Rights- “Promoting and encouraging respect for human rights and for fundamental freedoms for all withoutdistinction 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 safety ②respect for dignity and worth ③protection 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: fromterritorial 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 action • On 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

The Responsibility to Protect Chapters 1 & 2