This article investigates the complex relationship between atrocity prevention and other related – yet distinct – norms of the Responsibility to Protect (R2P) norm cluster. It analyses how this ...cluster operates to help states, and other actors, properly discharge their responsibility. Central to the analysis is the realisation that abstractly aligned norms can clash in practice. Based on an extensive analysis of the 67 European Union (EU) documents and statements referring to R2P, and drawing on elite interviews with EU diplomats, we find that atrocity prevention has been ‘grafted’ onto the EU’s other normative commitments – including conflict resolution and democracy promotion – without sufficient acknowledgement of the cluster’s complexity and the need to prioritise atrocity prevention vis-à-vis these other linked norms. We ask whether this framing not only filtered but also diluted the normative power of atrocity prevention, leading to policies that manifestly failed to prevent the genocide that occurred in Myanmar from 2017. We find that the grafting of atrocity prevention onto related yet distinct norms contributed to an underestimation of the threat of genocide and a misplaced faith in the ability of democratic transition to prevent atrocity. However, we also find that factors unrelated to the normative framing of R2P influenced the EU’s willingness and ability to respond to atrocity crimes that occurred in the lead up to the genocide that began in 2017. The article contributes to our understanding of the as yet unstated normative implication of clustering norms and the EU’s implementation of R2P.
Since Indonesia gained independence in 1945, security dynamics have been intricately linked with conflict. The emergence of separatist movements, such as the Free Papua Movement or Free Papua ...Organization (Organisasi Papua Merdeka or OPM), has significantly disrupted Indonesia’s stability. This study aims to analyze the actions undertaken by OPM in their quest for independence, utilizing the perspective of the Montevideo Convention of 1933. Employing a qualitative descriptive research methodology, this research relies on secondary data from a literature review focused on the Papua region. The study reveals several key findings: The size and stability of a population are critical factors for the existence of a state. West Papua, with a population of 1.15 million, plays a pivotal role. The establishment of well-defined territories is crucial for distinguishing and representing nations. The proposed establishment of the Republic of West Papua has garnered support and recognition from nations like Vanuatu. Moreover, the Republic of West Papua actively engages in international organizations such as UNPO. Establishing and exercising effective government control over a nation’s territory is essential for asserting sovereignty and maintaining independence. This is exemplified by the Papua National Manifesto and the declaration of Papua’s independence in 1961. Building and maintaining relationships with other countries necessitate active participation in the global community. International recognition and support play pivotal roles in achieving long-term political goals. Challenges related to democracy, human rights, and environmental issues pose significant hurdles to Indonesia’s diplomatic relations. The Responsibility to Protect (R2P) principle offers a framework for preventing mass atrocities and holding state actors accountable for crimes against humanity. International cooperation and dialogue are imperative in addressing these complex issues and safeguarding the well-being of affected populations.
Abstract
This article begins by critically assessing some of the current measures used to evaluate the status and impact of the Responsibility to Protect (RtoP). It then lays the groundwork for a ...deeper examination of RtoP's strength by specifying what kind of norm it is, and what it can reasonably be expected to do. The third section engages Zimmerman and Deitelhoff's framework on norm robustness and contestation by positing two arguments. First, the past decade of diplomatic engagement and policy development has brought about greater consensus on RtoP's core elements, and thus enhanced its validity; however, this process has also dampened many of RtoP's original cosmopolitan aspirations. Second, persistent applicatory contestation about RtoP's so-called third pillar is revealing deeper concerns about the norm's justification – thereby leading some actors to avoid framing situations with RtoP terminology. I use two cases to address the broader theoretical questions raised about whether and how language matters in assessing norm robustness: the international community's response to the deepening political violence in Burundi in 2015, and the evolution of the international community's response to the war in Syria (2011–17). While these cases illustrate changing perceptions of the political utility of RtoP language, concrete engagement by the international community, particularly in the Burundi case, indicates that RtoP's validity remains intact. The article concludes that norm decay is not equivalent to norm death, and that RtoP's prescriptions will survive given that they are embedded in a broader normative structure of human rights, humanitarian law, and civilian protection.
Abstract
Nigeria's traditional role as a security provider in West Africa being a sub-regional hegemon and mainspring of the ECOWAS has enjoyed scholarly engagement since the end of the Cold War. Its ...advocacy for the 'African solutions to African problems' has been a critical component of its African diplomacy since independence in 1960. This advocacy finds its loudest expression in the leadership roles it played in peacekeeping efforts in the continent in tandem with what has been dubbed Pax-Nigeriana. However, Nigeria's intervention in the Gambian political crisis has generated endless controversies in light of its regional hegemonic disposition. The study, against this background, investigates its intervention in this tiny West African country. It argues, within the context of hegemonic stability theory, that its intervention presents little evidence to suggest that Abuja's 'leadership role' in the resolution of the crisis is indicative of hegemonic influence.
This article aims to discuss the Principles of Responsibility to Protect (R2P) that may be applied to the conflict in the Gaza Strip between Israel and Palestine. This normative legal research using ...a conceptual approach and a case approach indicates that the humanitarian crisis resulting from the conflict needs to be the focus of the international community, and the R2P principle may be applied as an alternative solution. Although the R2P principle is not a legal formulation, R2P plays an important role. It is recognized as an emerging norm or an obligation with a legal significance. R2P has been agreed upon and accepted by most countries globally that are members of the United Nations through UN General Assembly Resolutions. R2P assigns responsibility to the international community to help parties protect populations from the crime of genocide. Ultimately, R2P is expected to encourage states to fulfill their legal responsibilities and obligations, help build capacity to protect populations, and provide assistance to states in emergencies.
This article addresses the empirical puzzle as to why some formerly deeply embedded international norms either incrementally or rapidly lose their prescriptive status and, in the extreme, can even ...cease to exist. Why is it that some norms are replaced while others simply disappear? The IR literature has rich explanations for norm creation, diffusion and socialization, yet there is a theoretical and empirical gap on both the dynamics and scope conditions for the degeneration of international norms. Thus, we develop hypotheses on processes and outcomes of norm disappearances that are tested with a series of qualitative studies. Norm degenerations require the presence of actors who challenge the norm and the absence of central enforcement authorities or individual states that are willing and capable of punishing norm violations. Moreover, our study shows that norms are likely to be abolished swiftly if the environment is unstable and rapidly changing and if norms are highly precise. In contrast, norms are likely to become incrementally degenerated if the environment is relatively stable and if norms are imprecise. Both processes lead to norm substitutions, provided that competing norms are present. If rival norms are absent, norms simply disappear without being replaced.
Introduction The right to self-determination could be applied in situations aiming to prevent crimes against humanity that are subject to the responsibility to protect. Generally, governments that ...violate the right to self-determination of their people, including minority groups, are more prone to committing these heinous crimes. The doctrine of the responsibility to protect seeks to establish a responsible government toward its citizens; The protection aspect of the doctrine has been discussed in this research, which does not necessarily include intervention. Adhering to human rights standards and exercising the right to self-determination in the framework of the responsibility to protect is a foundation to prevent situations that can lead to atrocities and widespread violations of human rights. Thus, this can be considered as the link between the right to self-determination and the responsibility to protect. Literature ReviewThe right to self-determination of people has been an important subject of much legal research as a fundamental principle of international law. On the other hand, the responsibility to protect is also among the attractive topics of international law as a new doctrine. The two notions have been separately discussed by researchers such as Antonio Cassese, Jörg Fisch, Yasmine Nahlawi, and Stacey Henderson.It can be claimed that the subject of this article which is an updated version of the corresponding author’s master’s thesis, is an innovative topic in the international law literature and has not been explored before. MethodologyFirstly, a descriptive research method has been used for this research i.e., the characteristics and aspects of the right to self-determination and the responsibility to protect have been discussed separately. Secondly, based on the legal research method, the governments’ experiences in different situations have been observed to reach the final research result regarding the commonalities of these two notions. ResultsFrom the international law’s point of view, the internal aspect of the right to self-determination is an erga omnes rule, and its external dimension has been accepted as a jus cogens rule.However, it should be noted that a separatist interpretation of the right to self-determination has no place in the current system of international law. International legal doctrines, governments’ stances, and international documents always emphasize on the importance and priority of the principle of territorial integrity. Further, international peace and security requires that separatist interpretations not be supported. ConclusionToday, respecting human rights and, most importantly, the right to self-determination is a global matter and the international community should contribute to its realization. The right to self-determination can be realized indirectly under the doctrine of responsibility to protect. In other words, the right to self-determination can be applied as a means of preventing the occurrence of crimes that are subject to the responsibility to protect doctrine, and in this regard, the international community can assist and take measures and put them on its agenda to ensure the exercise of this right.The responsibility to protect emphasizes the primary responsibility of governments and the international community to assist other countries in carrying out their sovereign duties and only refers to the element of intervention at the last stage. the international community should come to the understanding that non-interventionist measures and international aid to the governments have a fundamental role and importance in supporting people and strengthening them and are to the benefit of international peace and security. The application of the responsibility to protect in Libya and the remedial secession in Kosovo showed how ineffective and destructive under-developed legal theories can be in practice.On the other hand, the doctrine of responsibility to protect suffers from a lack of clear criteria for intervention which is a problem that the international community should take steps to resolve. In many cases, powerful countries, especially the permanent members of the Security Council, apply double standards towards human rights issues. So, in order to prevent similar tragedies and protect the citizens, the international community should set clear and thorough standards regarding human rights issues and make them binding. However, it should be noted that the concept of cultural diversity should be taken into account In the process of formulating standards because, in issues related to human rights, no fixed standard that could be applied to all.
Practice theory provides important insights into the workings of the Security Council. The contribution is currently limited, however, by the conjecture that practice theory operates on ‘a different ...analytical plane’ to norm/normative theory. Building on existing critiques, we argue that analysing practices separately from normative positions risks misappropriating competence and reifying practice that is not fit for purpose. This risk is realized in Adler-Nissen and Pouliot’s practice-based account of the Libya crisis. By returning the normative context created by the Responsibility to Protect to the analytical foreground, and by drawing on a pragmatic conception of ‘ethical competence’, we find that pre-reflexive practices uncritically accepted as markers of competence — for example, ‘penholding’ — can contribute to the Council’s failure to act collectively in the face of mass atrocity. Drawing on extensive interview material, we offer an alternative account of the Libya intervention, finding that the practices of the permanent three (France, the UK and the US) did not cultivate the kind of collective consciousness that is required to implement the Responsibility to Protect. This is further illustrated by an account of the Security Council’s failure in Syria, where the permanent three’s insistence on regime change instrumentalized the Council at the expense of Responsibility to Protect-appropriate practice. This changed when elected members became ‘penholders’. Practice theory can facilitate learning processes that help the Council meet its responsibilities, but only through an approach that combines its insights with those of norm/normative theory.
PDF
