Responsibility To Protect

Since its adoption by world leaders at the World Summit in 2005, the Responsibility to Protect (herein R2P) has been hailed as a major achievement in protecting populations from genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity, or ethnic cleansing that would be committed by rulers. However, some see the R2P not as an effective human right instrument for civilians’ protection as it appears to be another tool for imperialism. My position in this essay is that I believe the R2P doctrine is a considerable achievement in world politics as it signals to potential perpetrators of mass atrocities that the world would no longer stand by, but will use force when necessary to protect innocent civilians. My position is articulated as follows. First, I will present the content/principles of the R2P doctrine . Second, I will point out the legal and moral argument underpinning the R2P, particularly its military aspect. Finally I will evoke some cases where the R2P has been critical in protecting populations from mass killing and show the shortcoming of those who argue against the R2P.

First of all, the R2P clearly states that: i) the State has the primary responsibility to protect its population from heinous human rights abuses such as genocide, war crimes, crime against humanity and ethnic cleansing; ii) the international community has the responsibility to assist States in fulfilling their primary responsibility as indicated in point i) and as such, it should use appropriate diplomatic, humanitarian and other peaceful means to protect populations from those crimes; iii) however, when a State fails to protect its own populations or is the actual perpetrator of such crimes against its populations, the international community must be prepared to ta...

... middle of paper ...

...international humanitarian and human rights laws as well as international customary laws. There are convincing legal and moral arguments in favor of the use of military intervention as the last resort to protect populations from actual or imminent acts of genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity or ethnic cleansing. The NATO intervention in Libya in 2011 is a good illustration of the importance of the R2P for the protection of populations from atrocities. The argument of opponents to the R2P is not convincing at all as it only covers one part of the three responsibilities of the R2P.

Works Cited

1. World Summit Outcome Document

2. Roland Paris, “R2P Is Not a License for Military Recklessness”, in the Centre for International Policy Study’s blog (March 12, 2012), retrieved online at http://cips.uottawa.ca/r2p-is-not-a-license-for-military-recklessness/