Open Access Research Article
THE RESPONSIBILITY TO PROTECT (R2P) AND ITS APPLICATION IN MODERN CONFLICTS.
Published Paper
Article Details
THE
RESPONSIBILITY TO PROTECT (R2P) AND ITS APPLICATION IN MODERN CONFLICTS.
AUTHORED BY- KHYATI KUSHWAH
3RD YEAR BBA.LLB
SYMBIOSIS LAW SCHOOL, NAGPUR
ABSTRACT.
The
“Responsibility to protect” is the three pillar principle based on the
principle of humanitarian intervention.
It is the document adopted by the ‘United Nations General Assembly’ in 2005,
which will govern the international
community response to the mass atrocities. This paper will make an attempt to shed light on the new developed
emerging principle in the international community “Responsibility to Protect”,
also known as R2P. We will also try to figure out its use and abuse of the principle within the international
relation landscape. The principle of responsibility to protect is the principle which states that,
every state have the responsibility to protect their individual from mass atrocities, genocide, mass crime
and voilence, ethnic cleaning and crime against humanity. When a state is unable or inadequate to protect the
individuals from these types of crimes
then the responsibility shifts to the international
community or organisation to protect the individuals from these crimes
irrespective of their
state or religion. It is equally
available to every individual of every state. The
principle of ‘Responsibility to protect’ is critised due to the selective
application of the principle, this principle is being accused of selective
application in the state influenced by their own and
political interest by powerful state and authority rather than the principle of humanitarian concern.
This paper has also discussed the pros and cons of the selective application of the principle of ‘Responsibility to
Protect’. the problem of selective application of the principle will defeat the basic purpose
of the law, for what it was made and also will question the credibility
and authenticity of the principle. This has also resulted in double standard principle choosing between
interest and humanitarian intervention. The purpose of this research paper is to trace the history and development
of the principle of responsibility to protect,
also the practical implications of the principle. Also has tried to resolve the
problem of selective application,
transparency, accountability and consistency. This paper will also look into the active site and use and abuse of the
power to intervene. The application of the principle in international crises, author have chosen the case study of Libya
and Syria, to look into the depth and
implication of the principle practically. The international community has to
get together to resolve the problem
and take efficient measures to efficiently apply the principle and to uphold the principle of “ Responsibility to
Protect”.
KEYWORDS. Responsibility to protect (R2P), United
Nations General Assembly (UNGA), Mass
atrocities, Genocide, Selective application, International relations.
INTRODUCTION.
“Responsibility to protect” is the principle that has emerged after the
worldwide suffering from the mass
genocides and the mass crimes that had taken place in the 20th century. “Responsibility
to protect” represents the historic
turning point in the global atmosphere.
The idea to protect the individuals or the population from the heinous violence and
abuse is being adopted at courties
level as well as at international level. This represents that countries and as well as the international community
or organisation have the responsibility to the individuals from these types of heinous
crime and mass violence.
The adoption of responsibility to protect in modern conflicts has very
complicated and difficult procedures.
Responsibility to protect (R2P)
provides the framework for interference to avoid mass crimes and violence and the practical
implementation requires very advanced and complicated methods. International coordination and cooperation
with consistent commitment to protect the individuals and their human rights is being very challenging.
This highlights the importance of careful consideration of the possible
repercussions as well as the long
term consequences of R2P actions and also should consider the recovery efforts
to solve the root causes of such
crimes and the violence. Also should
have taken preventive measures and
measures to solve the root cause. In
summary, RtoP uses an interpretation of sovereignty that differs from the classic Westphalian idea of sovereignty,
as well as three pillars, to justify humanitarian
intervention on moral and legal grounds. ‘Sovereignty’ as ‘Responsibility’
seeks to shift the focus of
sovereignty away from traditional definitions of non-intervention and towards the responsibility of rulers or those in
power to protect the lives of their citizens, and thus the responsibility of the international
community to protect those same citizens in the absence of domestic
leadership. The Responsibility to Protect is now part
of the international relations vocabulary,
having essentially superseded humanitarian intervention, while the latter is
still often referred to negatively.
The move from ‘Humanitarian intervention’ to a ‘Responsibility to protect’ changes the debate's focus and seeks to
reinterpret a key notion in international relations.
Responsibility to protect (R2P) is the norm and the political principle
which aim to prevent and respond to atrocities, genocide,
mass violence and crimes against humanity. It is needed
to resolve the conflict between
states and human rights orgainisation in order to protect individuals. States sovereignty includes both rights
and responsibilities of the state to protect the individuals being the state’s duty to protect. When
states are unable or unwilling to do its duty to protect the individual, the international community
comes into the picture and takes the responsibility to protect the individuals from mass crimes,
atrocities and the crimes against
humanity. International community
intervenes in the states' matters
and protects the individuals and performs
the duty to protect. Responsibility to
protect (R2P) provides the framework for interference to avoid mass crimes and violence and the practical
implementation requires very advanced and complicated methods. International coordination and cooperation
with consistent commitment to protect the individuals and their human rights is being very challenging.
This highlights the importance of careful consideration of the possible
repercussions as well as the long
term consequences of R2P actions and also should consider the recovery efforts
to solve the root causes of such
crimes and the violence.
The principle of responsibility to protect was adopted by the world
summit in 2005, prioritizing the duty
of the state to protect its citizens with the international community's
responsibility to intervene when
states fail to do its duty. In spite of the progress of the responsibility to
protect and the implementation of R2P
their being remains challenges like ongoing conflicts, disputes and disagreements in international law.
RESPONSIBILITY TO PROTECT (R2P).
“Responsibility to protect” is the principle of when the states have responsibility
to protect the individuals from the
mass atrocities; genocide; mass crimes; ethnic crimes and crimes against humanity,
when state’s fails to perform
their duty then international community
have the responsibility to protect the individuals by intervention in the state.[1]
The “Responsibility to Protect” (R2P or RtoP) aims to prevent tragic
events and restore society subsequently.
It represented the policy implementation of "never again". R2P is a
rising standard in international
relations, human rights, and security, defining ethical conduct in the
international community. R2p is
founded on the principles of respecting state sovereignty and refraining from interfering in domestic matters.
Even though sovereignty includes self-determination and territorial
integrity as the most essential rights of a state, it also entails the
obligation to safeguard individuals
inside its borders. The concept of non-intervention was critical in the
formation of the United Nations.
However, the third pillar
of R2P states that the international community is accountable for taking action when a state fails to protect its
population from one or more of the four
crimes. Every state holds primary duty for safeguarding populations under its
authority against genocide, war crimes,
ethnic cleansing, and crimes against humanity. Nonetheless, if the territorial state fails to halt these
crimes or is reluctant to do so, the international community is obligated
to interfere. Sovereignty includes responsibility, hence nonintervention is contingent on the
territorial state performing its obligation to safeguard its population.
In 2009, UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon put forward the
"Implementing the Responsibility to Protect" report, which outlined 3 pillars of R2P.[2]
The first pillar explains the new approach
to sovereignty, emphasizing nations' main responsibility to protect citizens from
mass atrocities and crimes. The second pillar, emphasizes the international community's commitment
to assisting governments in developing their capacity to avoid mass crimes, stating that prevention is essential for a successful responsibility to protect approach. And according to the
third pillar, if a state fails to defend its people, the international community must respond quickly and
decisively as a collective.
The principle of “Responsibility to protect”, is also known as the “Three pillars of responsibility to protect”.
Pillar
I:
“The protection responsibilities of the
state” – "Each individual state
has the responsibility to protect its population from genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing, and crimes against
humanity". It is the responsibility of every individual state to protect
the population from atrocities, genocide,
ethnic cleansing and crime against
humanity. It is mentioned that the primary duty is to protect the
individuals from the mass atrocities and mass crimes is the duty or responsibility of the respective state.
Pillar
II:
“International assistance and
capacity-building” – States pledge to
assist each other in their protection
responsibilities. It is the responsibility of the international community to
handle and take actions to aid the
states to perform the responsibility with long-term and short-term goals. If the state has failed to protect the
individuals from the mass atrocities and mass crime, then the secondary duty or responsibility lies with
the international community to protect the individuals.
Pillar
III:
“Collective actions taken timely and decisive” – If any state is "manifestly
failing" in its protection
responsibilities, then states should take “Collective action” to protect the individuals.
The responsibility of the international community to take collective
action and make decisions in an
effective manner on time. If any states have manifestly failed in the
responsibility to protect, the states together should take collective
action to protect the individuals.[3]
DEVELOPMENT OF RESPONSIBILITY TO PROTECT
“Responsibility to protect”, is the concept
when the responsibility of states shifts to the international community to protect and safeguard the responsibility of protecting individuals. The “Responsibility to protect” (R2P) principle has evolved
significantly after the failure of the international community to prevent mass crimes and violence by protecting individuals from such crimes.
Responsibility to protect represents a new era on an international level after
the tragedies in the 19th century. The responsibility to protect was a classical
idea of state sovereignty that
aimed to safeguard its population from genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing, and crimes
against humanity.
The “International Commission on
Intervention and States Sovereignty” (ICISS) had given a report for the groundwork for responsibility to protect and the criteria
for intervention in such a situation
where states fail to protect their citizens and maintain their human rights.
The incentive concluded in the 2005 united nations
world summit, where this notion has been adopted
widely as part of commitment to
global human security. Since then, responsibility to protect has become the practice of the international community with principles incorporated by United Nations
resolutions and regional organisations. The evolution of R2P was always
being problematic and conflicts
arose.
HISTORY OF RESPONSIBILITY TO PROTECT
The “Responsibility to protect” has
its roots in the late 19thn century, as a result of many mass violence
and crimes against
the individuals, when states fail to protect their
individuals from mass atrocities. The
concept of “Responsibility to protect”, (R2P) has evolved after the failing of states in the protection and doing their
duty to protect the individuals from mass crimes and violence. This concept is the response of the failure of states,
state fails in historical event that influenced
the development of responsibility to protect also included the genocide
happpend during the world war.
These all mishappening and the
state’s failure leads to the need for a framework that can protect the individuals from mass atrocities and
the international obligation to protect individuals from mass crimes and violence. The concept of ‘humanitarian intervention’ also evolved in the framework in responsibility to protect. The 1990s have witnessed a series of events of humanitarian
crisis and how states have failed to protect its individuals from the mass
atrocities.
These catastrophic events highlighted
the need for such a framework and also the limited state sovereignty and promoted the idea of international intervention
in order to protect the individual from
mass atrocities. The aftermath of these events turned into the formation of
ICISS to resolve the tension between
the states sovereneignity and the international community responsibility to protect the individuals from mass genocide,
crimes, ethnic cleansing and the crimes against the humanity. Then the commission report was released in 2001, which
introduced the concept of Responsibility
to Protect.
The principle ‘Restonsibility to protect’ have gained significant support
and aknowledgmnet when it was adoped by the “United Nation world summit”. The
summit's outcome was the document of responsibility to protect as a framework for the response of the
mass atrocities, also creating the primary duty of states to protect the individuals and the secondary
duty to the international community to protect.
After the 2005 world summit, the concept of responsibility to protect
became a more important concept in international course and practice.[4] The United Nations
security council has utilized the concept of responsibility to protect
in many situations, intervention in Libya (2011), Syria (2014) and Iraq (2016). In spite of its evolving nature, this
concept has always faced debates and challenges.
There are critics about the potential misuse of responsibility to protect to
justify unlawful intervention and
about the inconsistency of international responses.
IMPORTANCE AND USAGE OF R2P.
The security of individuals and communities with state sovereignty is very important
in international relations.
Responsibility to protect is the principle with helps to conserve the states sovereignty with protection of the
individuals from the mass atrocities, genocide, mass crimes and crimes against humanity. Also
responsibility to protect, is the concept formed to end these mass atrocities and mass crimes. Responsibility to protect is the norm from
that international community got authority to interfere in the states matter when states fails to protect
the individuals from the mass crimes.
This principle is used to save and protect the state's sovereignty and rights of individuals.[5]
It is a very important aspect in the international field, to protect the individuals and prevent such
crimes from taking place. It is used when state fails to protect its population from mass atrocities, genocide or mass
crimes, international community takes the responsibility to protect the individuals from such crimes. States sovereignty and integrity
are questioned when such mis-happening is done, to protect and safeguard the sovereignty
and integrity of the state, “ responsibility to protect” is needed to be
executed with proper precautions and measures.[6]
SELECTIVE APPLICATION OF R2P.
The responsibility to protect, is the principle to assert the
international organisation to protect the individual from mass atrocities and mass crime. But, the
principle of responsibility to protect also
had to face some criticism and challenges and through this paper we will try to
find and resolve the problem of
selective application.
Selective application means to the biases and the inconsistency in the
process to implementing responsibility
to protect.it is argued that this principle is invoked on the basis of
political agendas and political
interests. This principle is to protect and safeguard the individuals without
their nationality or country. This is
always argued that application of the principle is always politically motivated. It is said that powerful
states or countries generally apply responsibility to protect principle selectively as their supporting
and non-supporting interest. Powerful states will tend to prioritize their interest over
humanitarian concerns. Religion also contributes to the cause of the misuse or selective application of the
responsibility to protect. Religion is something that is very personal and sentimental to people and it
was very evident from the international history that religion can lead to wars, mass violence and even many more.
Religion can influence or motivate people
very easily, people in the name of god can do any bad for their religion. Many
times it is shown in history that how religion overpower humanity
in the society.
The problem of selective application will undermine the reason for which
it is founded and also defeat the
purpose of the principle to protect. To maintain the trust and confidence of
people in the norm, these issues need
to be resolved. People will lose their faith and trust in these kinds of organizations if the basic purpose is
defeated, and it is important that the people have trust in these principles that are made for their protection. The duty for
protection whether on states or on
the international community should be fulfilled irrespective of the fact that
where the political interest lies.
The misuse of this principle can lead to many severe consequences and will lead
to the question of national interest
and the sovereignty norm.
To resolve this issue there must be norms that can help to restore
sovereignty and there is need for
clear and efficient implementation of responsibility to protect principle. This
can undermine the trust and effectiveness of the principle ‘responsibility to protect’. The issue of selective application may end up in demands of
double standards in international relations. Transparency and accountability can help in achieving
the goal of responsibility to protect. There should be transparency in the working and as well as in their decision
making in implementation of the principle
and their actions should also be made liable or responsible for their act or
omission.
PROS AND CONS OF SELECTIVE APPLICATION OF RESPONSIBILITY TO PROTECT
Let us now know what are the pros and cons of the selective application
of the principle of responsibility to
protect. As of now there are not many prons to this, but selective application helps us to acknowledge the limited
resources and the political agenda while resolving the issue. Acknowledging the issue of limited
resources is how to efficiently and efficiently utilize the resource
with keeping in mind the principle of optimum utilisation of the resources. Also political agenda plays an important role in selective application of
responsibility to protect. These are
factors that are to be considered while addressing the issues of mass
atrocities.
States having the opportunity to prioritize their political interest and
their interventions will help them to
strategize their policies and approach for their international framework.
Selective application leads to contradiction and violation of universal human rights and the principle of equal protection. Various
rights are violated: right to life, right to equality, right to freedom, live with dignity and many more.
Just because the individual belongs to a particular country or a particular religion. Treating people differently or
unequally will lead to injustice and grave
inequality to them. Prioritizing the interventions on bases of their political
interest or their strategy can lead
to loss of many lives and loss of humanity. People will lose their faith and
trust in the process of law.
Majorly selective application of ‘responsibility to protect’ will defeat
the sole purpose of this law or
principle, it is meant to save people from mass atrocities and for their
protection.
Sticking to the principle of responsibility to protect with their political and social agenda
it is very difficult and challenging
for the countries as well as the
international community.
CASE STUDY
Ø CASE OF LIBYA
The issue in Libya have rooted from the
political changes due to the “Arab Spring” uprising. Uprising was begin in early
2011. The political protests were demanding the end of the leadership of Muammar Gaddafi, the
leadership of Gaddafi was began in Tripoli and have extended although the nation
which have resulted in civil war and humanitarian crisis. Starting from February
to August 2010 Gaadfi troops have detained individuals in hundreds from the country,
including antigovernment, demonstration, government opponents and persons who are
accused of providing information to international media and human right organisation.
Known of the situation “Arab League” took a strong action against the gaddafi regime
of using force, suspended libya, convened an extraordinary session, and calling
it on the security council to take necessary measures to impose a no-fly zone and
intervene to protect the population while respecting neighbouring countries sovereignty
and integrity. From significant human rights violation, Gaddafi was in intent of
assertion to conduct mass crimes, the UN Security Council have issused resolution
on february 26, 2011. It was an attempt to peacefully end the Libyan crisis. The resolution have emphaised on libyan
authorities to have the obligation to protect their individuals and referred the matter to the ICC, and imposed
weapons embargo, travel ban and freeze
on number of identified individuals assertion. In the early march, the UN
security council approved the
resolution of no-fly zone over libya and the permission for airstrikes to
protect the individuals and NATO will
take this mission under their command. On march
2011 United Nations security council
finally authorized military action to be taken in libya to safeguard the libyan
population is the primary goal of the mission. Military
intervention by NATO in Libya and
launched the idea that world should stand
by whwn mass crimes happen in a sovereign state. In the response to the dictatorship of Libyan president
Gaadfi, a massive and inhumane attack on the
people of his country. The resolution passed by the United Nations Security
Council in 1970 and 1973. The resolution called for an arms embargo
and no-fly zone. Further the resolution authorsied
member nations and regional organisation to adopt and take all necessary
measures to responsibility to protect
and protect the individuals from the mass crimes nad protect the states sovernity and integrity. After some time
NATO effort grow beyond the original mandate for assisting for anti-Gaddfi troop. NATO have conducted a seven
month effort to protect the people from mass crimes and attacks in libya. By launching hundreds
of air strikes against the attack and government. After one year in
october, Gaddfi was eventually apprehended and executed. After the proclaiming libya officially liberated and announced
the election, the security council directed
to end the military operation in libya. The security council unanimously
endorsed the resolution eliminating the UN mandated
by military action and lifting
the no-fly zone over Libya which was established in march 2011.[7]
Ø CASE OF SYRIA
Started
in march 2011, the syrian conflict have been shifted from peaceful protects
which was isolated to the large-scale rallies, with the aid of
president Bashar al-Assad’s administration which
was established the free syrian army. Since that, the army regime have carried
out the operation against the
civilians of the state. Executing from the arrest of the political activists to torture and execution. Syria have denied
that government have done any such atrocities and have been justifying its action by stated that it was as a response to opposition group or party
attacks.
There was a massive
human right violation
taken place and was in continuation. Syiarna
government and troops have
killed many peaceful demonstrator than the armed rebellion in libya.
However, the principle of responsibility to protect have not been
considered in syria, unlike was happened
in libya. The proposed resolution for syria have not authourised the deployment
of international forces and sanction
for the same. On 16 march, U.N envoy
Kofi unveiled a six pointer peace
proposal for syria. President of syria Assad have embarked the proposal and
have ensured taht his administration
will follow the proposal. However, the regime have continued to kill the protestors in syria. Febuaury 4, 2012 was the day when the UN
security council have approved the
resolution draft with 13 votes in favor and the veto by China and Russia. On
July 19, 2012 China and Russia used their
veto power to prevent another reolution. But this time south africa and pakistan abstained, and have
empasising on the need of finding a peaceful
conclusion with the help of negotiation as well as the importance of
maiantiang sovereignty and integrity of the syrian territory.[8]
The lack of ability to approve a resolution on Syria was also directly
tied to NATO operation of libya. Some
of the scholler think that the differences are inside the UN Security council
which have a direct influence on the
future of responsibility to protect. The explanation which was provided by the china and russia was that
Syria have lacked to protect its individuals that is the reason they have used their right to veto on the resolution also
because the resolution failed to hold
the opposition forces accountable for the mass atrocities. India, china,
russia, brazil and south africa veto
in the second resolution because it have been failed to call on the opposition
to dis-associate from the extremists.
They are more concerned about that the resolution would not result in armed intervention, which has
been done at the time of libya intervention.
CONCLUSION.
This research has given a comprehensive study of the principle of “Responsibility to protect” by tracing its development and history of the
principle. Also how this have emerged as a new norm in the international community. Establishing the responsibility to the states and to the international community to protect the
individuals, from mass atrocities, genocide, mass crimes, crime against humanity. It has been established that
state have the primary responsibility to protect
and if states fails to protect the individual from mass atocites, genocide,
mass crimes and these types of
crimes than the responsibility shifts from state to international community to protect.
This is also argued that responsibility to protect principle have
selective application which is
influenced by political interest and their own interest. Although every aspect
have their own pros and cons, as
mentioned and discussed above. It is also mentioned how the international community have acted in the issue of
Libya and Syria in 2011. From how the resolution have proposed to intervention in the conflict and taking preventive
measures. Responsibility is not just to
protect them, it also to protect and take protective measures and try to bring
back at its original situation
without any crime, we can also say to restore the position.
The international community should act in a transparent manner and should
be accountable for their action, as
where power lies, use and misuse happens. It is also argued that some time unlawful
intervention can be covered by this principle. Power authority or state uses this principle to intervene in another state
for an unlawful purpose with malafide intention, also can cause damage
to state sovereignty and integrity.
The effective framework should be imposed and taken into consideration
for implication of the principle “Responsibility to Protect”, there should be certain conditions and essentials to imposing
the principle and also preventive measures to prevent its abuse and misuse by
powerful authorities. The principle is made for people's
protection, not for state interest and for their convenience. Principle
should go parallel with the principle of equality, there should not be any discrimination and misuse with the people
who need protection from mass atrocities, genocide , mass crimes and
voilence, and crime against
humanity.
[1] Gareth Evans & Mohamed Sahnoun,
The responsibility to protect, Vol. 81, No. 6 (Nov. - Dec., 2002), 99-100
[2] Global Center for the Responsibility to protect,
[3] Global Center for the Responsibility to protect,
[4] United nations,
%20Responsibility%20to%20Protect&text=Each%20individual%20State%20has%20the,through%20appropriate%2
0and%20necessary%20means.
(last visited on mar. 10, 2024)
[5] UNITED STATES INSTITUTE OF PEACE,
https://www.usip.org/programs/responsibility-protect-working-group,
(last visited on Feb. 20, 2024)
[6] Prof. (Dr.) Jasmeet Gulati, The Responsibility to Protect
under International Law with reference to the Afghan Crisis, INTERNATIONAL LAW BLOG
(Apr. 09, 2024, 08:15 pm),
[7] Global Center for the Responsibility to protect, https://www.globalr2p.org/countries/libya/,
(last visited on Mar. 14, 2024)
[8] Global Center for the Responsibility to protect, https://www.globalr2p.org/countries/syria/#:~:text=For%20over%20a%20decade%20the,a%20matter%20of%20stat
e%20policy.
(last visited on Mar.15, 2024)
Article Information
THE RESPONSIBILITY TO PROTECT (R2P) AND ITS APPLICATION IN MODERN CONFLICTS.
Authors: KHYATI KUSHWAH
- Journal IJLRA
- ISSN 2582-6433
- Published 2024/05/10
- Issue 7
About Journal
International Journal for Legal Research and Analysis
- Abbreviation IJLRA
- ISSN 2582-6433
- Access Open Access
- License CC 4.0
All research articles published in International Journal for Legal Research and Analysis are open access and available to read, download and share, subject to proper citation of the original work.
Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of International Journal for Legal Research and Analysis.