RESEARCH STARTER

Responsibility to protect

The "Responsibility to Protect" (R2P) is a global principle established in 2005 that emphasizes the obligation of states to safeguard their populations from serious harm, including genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity, and ethnic cleansing. R2P asserts that if a state fails to protect its citizens, the international community has a duty to intervene, employing diplomatic and humanitarian measures, and potentially military action as a last resort. This concept emerged from historical failures to address atrocities, such as the Rwandan genocide, and is recognized as an important norm in international relations, although not codified in international law.

R2P comprises three main elements: the primary responsibility of states to protect their populations, the commitment of the international community to assist states in fulfilling this duty, and the provision for international intervention if a state is unable or unwilling to safeguard its citizens. While R2P aims to enhance global accountability for human rights, it has faced criticism regarding its potential misuse as a justification for military interventions that may align with the interests of powerful nations. Additionally, the effectiveness of R2P is often questioned due to the complexities of geopolitical dynamics within the United Nations. Various instances, such as interventions in Libya and the ongoing challenges in Syria, illustrate the contentious debates surrounding the application of R2P in international conflicts.

Full Article

In international relations, the term “responsibility to protect,” or R2P, refers to a state’s responsibility to provide safety and security to its citizens and to the responsibility of the international community to provide security in circumstances where a state fails to do so. The term was introduced by the United Nations (UN) in 2005. R2P (also known as RtoP) is considered an international norm—that is, it is not specifically articulated by international law but is instead considered an accepted component of a generalized value system relating to state behavior, state sovereignty, international security, and human rights.

Overview

R2P consists of three components, introduced at the 2005 United Nations World Summit and confirmed by the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) in 2006. The first component dictates that each state in the international system has the primary responsibility to protect its people from genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity, and ethnic cleansing. The second component dictates that it is the responsibility of the international community to assist states in achieving security for their people. The third R2P component dictates that the international community should use all diplomatic and humanitarian means at its disposal in the event that a state fails to provide security for its people or is itself perpetrating crimes against humanity; if diplomacy fails, R2P dictates that the UNSC may authorize military intervention.

The formulation of R2P was motivated by past incidents of genocide and war crimes that went largely unchallenged by the international community, such as the 1994 Rwandan genocide. However, R2P follows a long history of UN initiatives aimed at safeguarding human rights and preventing atrocities, beginning with the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. In January 2009, eight regional and international nongovernmental organizations formed the International Coalition for the Responsibility to Protect (ICRtoP). The coalition works to enforce and strengthen R2P worldwide. ICRtoP serves as an advocate of R2P principles for world governments and assists in mobilizing human rights groups to prepare for humanitarian crises.

Critics of R2P suggest that the doctrine can be used as a pretext for military action that serves the interests of the intervening state or states and would otherwise be difficult to justify. Others question how R2P can function properly within the divided political dynamics of the UN. In May 2008, France cited R2P as the potential impetus for international intervention in Myanmar after parts of that country were destroyed by Cyclone Nargis. The country’s ruling military regime initially refused international aid but later relented. In August 2008, Russia cited the doctrine of R2P to justify its military action against Georgia, which attempted to reclaim the breakaway enclave of South Ossetia. In March 2011, the Council on Foreign Relations hailed the international military mission in Libya that toppled the regime of Muammar al-Qaddafi as a successful implementation of R2P. However, the UNSC has in other instances been criticized for its inability to come to any consensus regarding R2P doctrine, such as in relation to the Syrian civil war that began in 2011 and reportedly ended in a stalemate in 2023. However, by this time, 618,000 people had been killed.

Critics also argued that R2P was necessary but not invoked during Russia's invasion of Ukraine, which began in 2022, to stop the atrocities being committed against Ukrainian civilians. Russia was one of the five permanent members of the UNSC but broke its promise to uphold state sovereignty by invading Ukraine and violating the human rights of its people. According to E-International Relations in 2022, R2P was necessary in Ukraine, especially after the civilian executions in Bucha, a suburb near Kyiv, Ukraine's capital. However, members of the UN questioned which country should intervene to protect Ukrainians when its country could not. Ultimately, the United States and its allies opted to provide weapons and aid to Ukraine while invoking sanctions against Russia.



Bibliography

Bajoria, Jayshree. “Libya and the Responsibility to Protect.” Council on Foreign Relations. Council on Foreign Relations, 24 Mar 2011. Web. 7 Oct. 2013.

Barber, Rebecca. "Reflections on the Three Pillars of the Responsibility to Protect, and a Possible Alternative Approach." Australian Journal of International Affairs, vol. 77, no. 4, 9 Aug. 2023, pp. 415-422, doi.org/10.1080/10357718.2023.2241835. Accessed 14 Feb. 2025.

Bellamy, Alex J. Responsibility to Protect. Cambridge: Polity, 2009. Print.

Cotler, Irwin, and Jared Genser. “Libya and the Responsibility to Protect.” New York Times. New York Times, 28 Feb. 2013. Web. 7 Oct. 2013.

Hehir, Aidan. The Responsibility to Protect: Rhetoric, Reality, and the Future of Humanitarian Intervention. Basingstoke: Palgrave, 2012. Print.

Ignatieff, Michael. “The Duty to Protect, Still Urgent.” New York Times.New York Times, 13 Sept. 2013. Web. 7 Oct. 2013.

Kristof, Nicolas D. “Who Will Stand Up for the Responsibility to Protect?” New York Times. New York Times, 1 Aug. 2013. Web. 7 Oct. 2013.

Lee, Peter. "Ukraine: The UN's 'Responsibility to Protect' Doctrine Is a Hollow Promise to Civilians Under Fire." The Conversation, 7 Mar. 2022, theconversation.com/ukraine-the-uns-responsibility-to-protect-doctrine-is-a-hollow-promise-for-civilians-under-fire-178661. Accessed 14 Feb. 2025.

Okoi, Obasesam. "Ukraine and the Failure of the Responsibility to Protect Norm." E-International Relations, 5 Sept. 2022, www.e-ir.info/2022/09/05/ukraine-and-the-failure-of-the-responsibility-to-protect-norm/. Accessed 14 Feb. 2025.

Orford, Anne. International Authority and the Responsibility to Protect. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 2011. Print.

“The Lessons of Libya.” Economist. Economist Group, 19 May 2011. Web. 7 Oct. 2013.

"Syrian Revolution 13 Years On | Nearly 618,000 Persons Killed Since the Onset of the Revolution in March 2011." Syrian Observatory for Human Rights (SOHR), 15 Mar. 2024, www.syriahr.com/en/328044/. Accessed 14 Feb. 2025.



Full Article

In international relations, the term “responsibility to protect,” or R2P, refers to a state’s responsibility to provide safety and security to its citizens and to the responsibility of the international community to provide security in circumstances where a state fails to do so. The term was introduced by the United Nations (UN) in 2005. R2P (also known as RtoP) is considered an international norm—that is, it is not specifically articulated by international law but is instead considered an accepted component of a generalized value system relating to state behavior, state sovereignty, international security, and human rights.

Overview

R2P consists of three components, introduced at the 2005 United Nations World Summit and confirmed by the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) in 2006. The first component dictates that each state in the international system has the primary responsibility to protect its people from genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity, and ethnic cleansing. The second component dictates that it is the responsibility of the international community to assist states in achieving security for their people. The third R2P component dictates that the international community should use all diplomatic and humanitarian means at its disposal in the event that a state fails to provide security for its people or is itself perpetrating crimes against humanity; if diplomacy fails, R2P dictates that the UNSC may authorize military intervention.

The formulation of R2P was motivated by past incidents of genocide and war crimes that went largely unchallenged by the international community, such as the 1994 Rwandan genocide. However, R2P follows a long history of UN initiatives aimed at safeguarding human rights and preventing atrocities, beginning with the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide. In January 2009, eight regional and international nongovernmental organizations formed the International Coalition for the Responsibility to Protect (ICRtoP). The coalition works to enforce and strengthen R2P worldwide. ICRtoP serves as an advocate of R2P principles for world governments and assists in mobilizing human rights groups to prepare for humanitarian crises.

Critics of R2P suggest that the doctrine can be used as a pretext for military action that serves the interests of the intervening state or states and would otherwise be difficult to justify. Others question how R2P can function properly within the divided political dynamics of the UN. In May 2008, France cited R2P as the potential impetus for international intervention in Myanmar after parts of that country were destroyed by Cyclone Nargis. The country’s ruling military regime initially refused international aid but later relented. In August 2008, Russia cited the doctrine of R2P to justify its military action against Georgia, which attempted to reclaim the breakaway enclave of South Ossetia. In March 2011, the Council on Foreign Relations hailed the international military mission in Libya that toppled the regime of Muammar al-Qaddafi as a successful implementation of R2P. However, the UNSC has in other instances been criticized for its inability to come to any consensus regarding R2P doctrine, such as in relation to the Syrian civil war that began in 2011 and reportedly ended in a stalemate in 2023. However, by this time, 618,000 people had been killed.

Critics also argued that R2P was necessary but not invoked during Russia's invasion of Ukraine, which began in 2022, to stop the atrocities being committed against Ukrainian civilians. Russia was one of the five permanent members of the UNSC but broke its promise to uphold state sovereignty by invading Ukraine and violating the human rights of its people. According to E-International Relations in 2022, R2P was necessary in Ukraine, especially after the civilian executions in Bucha, a suburb near Kyiv, Ukraine's capital. However, members of the UN questioned which country should intervene to protect Ukrainians when its country could not. Ultimately, the United States and its allies opted to provide weapons and aid to Ukraine while invoking sanctions against Russia.



Bibliography

Bajoria, Jayshree. “Libya and the Responsibility to Protect.” Council on Foreign Relations. Council on Foreign Relations, 24 Mar 2011. Web. 7 Oct. 2013.

Barber, Rebecca. "Reflections on the Three Pillars of the Responsibility to Protect, and a Possible Alternative Approach." Australian Journal of International Affairs, vol. 77, no. 4, 9 Aug. 2023, pp. 415-422, doi.org/10.1080/10357718.2023.2241835. Accessed 14 Feb. 2025.

Bellamy, Alex J. Responsibility to Protect. Cambridge: Polity, 2009. Print.

Cotler, Irwin, and Jared Genser. “Libya and the Responsibility to Protect.” New York Times. New York Times, 28 Feb. 2013. Web. 7 Oct. 2013.

Hehir, Aidan. The Responsibility to Protect: Rhetoric, Reality, and the Future of Humanitarian Intervention. Basingstoke: Palgrave, 2012. Print.

Ignatieff, Michael. “The Duty to Protect, Still Urgent.” New York Times.New York Times, 13 Sept. 2013. Web. 7 Oct. 2013.

Kristof, Nicolas D. “Who Will Stand Up for the Responsibility to Protect?” New York Times. New York Times, 1 Aug. 2013. Web. 7 Oct. 2013.

Lee, Peter. "Ukraine: The UN's 'Responsibility to Protect' Doctrine Is a Hollow Promise to Civilians Under Fire." The Conversation, 7 Mar. 2022, theconversation.com/ukraine-the-uns-responsibility-to-protect-doctrine-is-a-hollow-promise-for-civilians-under-fire-178661. Accessed 14 Feb. 2025.

Okoi, Obasesam. "Ukraine and the Failure of the Responsibility to Protect Norm." E-International Relations, 5 Sept. 2022, www.e-ir.info/2022/09/05/ukraine-and-the-failure-of-the-responsibility-to-protect-norm/. Accessed 14 Feb. 2025.

Orford, Anne. International Authority and the Responsibility to Protect. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 2011. Print.

“The Lessons of Libya.” Economist. Economist Group, 19 May 2011. Web. 7 Oct. 2013.

"Syrian Revolution 13 Years On | Nearly 618,000 Persons Killed Since the Onset of the Revolution in March 2011." Syrian Observatory for Human Rights (SOHR), 15 Mar. 2024, www.syriahr.com/en/328044/. Accessed 14 Feb. 2025.



More Like ThisRelated Articles

Related Articles (5)

Related Articles (5)