The Responsibility
to Protect
Report of the International
Commission on Intervention and State
SovereigntyDecember 2001
United Nations
The Commission
Initiated by Lloyd Axworthy
Gareth Evans, Co-ChairMohamed Sahnoun, Co-Chair
Gisèle Côté-Harper Michael IgnatieffKlaus Naumann Fidel RamosEduardo Stein Lee HamiltonVladimir Lukin Cyril RamaphosaCornelio Sommaruga Ramesh Thakur
The Report
Address the question-When, if ever, is it appropriate for states to take military action against another, for the purpose of human protection of the resident peoples?
Open air graveEthiopia - Eritrea border
New
Internationalist, 1999
The Report
• Is there a right of intervention?• How and when should it be
exercised?• Under whose authority?• Is intervention an assault on
sovereignty?
• One of the most controversial and difficult of all international relations questions.
Synopsis
Basic Principles
• State sovereignty implies responsibility for protecting own people.
• International responsibility when state is unwilling or unable to halt or avert the serious harm to its population.
Foundations
• Obligations inherent in the concept of sovereignty.
• The responsibility of the UN Security Council.
Foundations
• Specific legal obligations:– human rights and protection
declarations.– covenants and treaties.– humanitarian law.
• The developing practice of states, regional organizations and the Security Council.
Elements
• The responsibility to prevent– address root causes.
• The responsibility to react – respond with appropriate measures.
• The responsibility to rebuild– full assistance with recovery,
reconstruction and reconciliation.
The Balkansburning oil, polluted water
BB
C, 1999
Priorities
• Prevention is the single most important dimension.
• Less intrusive and coercive measures always considered before more coercive and intrusive ones are applied.
Principles for Military Intervention
• Just cause threshold
• Precautionary principles
• Right authority
• Operational principles
Just Cause Threshold
To warrant military intervention there must be serious and irreparable harm:
• Large scale loss of life.• Large scale ethnic cleansing.
Bujumbura, Burundi 1996 ethnic massacre
New
Internationalist, 1999
Precautionary Principles
• Right intention: – primary purpose must be to halt or
avert human suffering. – multilateral operations, clearly
supported by the victims concerned.
• Last resort: – every non-military option explored.– reasonable grounds for believing
lesser measures would not have succeeded.
Precautionary Principles
• Proportional means:– scale, duration and intensity of
should be the minimum necessary.
• Reasonable prospects: – reasonable chance of success. – consequences of action not worse
than the consequences of inaction.
Right Authority
• Security Council most appropriate body.
• Authorization always sought prior to intervention.
• Security Council should deal promptly with requests.
• The Permanent Five members should agree not to apply their veto power.
Right Authority
• If a proposal is rejected or not dealt with in a reasonable time, alternative options are:– General Assembly consideration
under the “Uniting for Peace” procedure.
– action by regional or sub-regional organizations.
Right Authority
• The Security Council must always consider its immense responsibility.– inaction may lead to concerned states
resorting to other means.– the nature and credibility of the
United Nations may suffer.
Operational Principles
• Clear objectives at all times.
• Common military approach among involved partners:– unity of command and clear
communications.
• Acceptance of limitations, incrementalism and gradualism:– objective human protection, not state
defeat.
Operational Principles
• Proportional rules of engagement that adhere to international humanitarian law.
• Force protection not the principal objective.
• Maximum coordination with humanitarian organizations.
Specific Issues
The Right to Intervene?
• Traditional term- has inherent problems.
• Focuses on the claims, rights and prerogatives of the intervening states.
• Does not account for preventive effort or follow-up assistance.
• Intrinsically more confrontational.
Objectives of a New Approach
1. Clearer rules, procedures and criteria for determining whether, when and how to intervene.
2. Legitimate military intervention when necessary and after all other approaches have failed.
Objectives of a New Approach
3. Effective military intervention carried out only for the purposes proposed, that minimizes the human costs.
4. Eliminate the causes of conflict while enhancing the prospects for durable and sustainable peace.
Human Security
• Security of people:– physical safety.– economic and social well being.– dignity and worth as human beings.– human rights and fundamental
freedoms.
• The Universal Declaration of human Rights (1948) embodies the moral code, political consensus and legal synthesis of human rights.
UP
I/Bettm
ann
Responsibility to Protect
Responsibility for protecting the lives of citizens lies with:
1. The sovereign state. 2. Domestic authorities acting in
partnership with external actors.3. International organizations.
Sovereignty
• Sovereignty does not grant unlimited power to a state regarding its own people.
• Implies a dual responsibility:– externally, respecting other states.– internally, respecting dignity and
rights of own population.
Genocide in Rwanda
BB
C, 2001
Kosovar refugees
BBC, 1999
Meaning of Intervention
• “Intervention” potentially covers a large number of activities.– controversial term.
• This report- “action taken against a state, without its consent, for claimed humanitarian or protective purposes.”
UN Intervention
• Legitimate because it is authorized by a representative international body.
• Unilateral intervention illegitimate because of self-interests.
• States must renounce unilateral use of force for national purposes.
UN General Assembly
United N
ations
Security Council (SC) Issues
Authority and credibility questions:
• Legal capacity to authorize military intervention.
• Political will.• Generally uneven performance.• Unrepresentative membership.• Permanent Five veto power.
UN Security Council
United N
ations
SC Past Performance
• Often fallen short of responsibilities.
• Due to factors such as:– sheer lack of interest.– concern about political impacts.– disagreements between permanent 5
members.– reluctance to bear the financial and
personnel burdens of international action.
SC - Report Conclusions
• Security Council most appropriate body for decisions about: – overriding state sovereignty.– mobilizing military resources.
• Goal - to make the Security Council work better than it has.
SC - Proposed Improvements
• A “code of conduct” for the use of the veto.– a permanent member would not
obstruct passing an otherwise majority resolution.
• Clear, responsible and consistent leadership.– never abdicating responsibility.– valuing human life above politics.
“If the collective conscience of humanity…cannot find in the United Nations its greatest tribune, there is a grave danger that it will look elsewhere for peace and for justice.”
Kofi Annan
World H
ealth Organization, 2001
Responsibility to Prevent
• First with the sovereign state.
• Failed prevention can have international consequences.
Responsibility to Prevent
• Strong support from the international community is often needed:– development assistance.– support for local initiatives to
advance good governance, human rights and/or rule of law.
– mediation efforts.
Dialogue between Israelis and Palestinians
Yes!, 1998
Prevention Resources
• Organization of African Unity - 1993 Mechanism for Conflict Prevention , Management and Settlement.
• Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe - developed a number of mechanisms for preventing conflict in Europe.
• Increasingly significant role of NGOs.
Responsibility to React
• Intervention from a broader community of states:– in situations of compelling human
need.– if prevention has failed.
• Coercive measures include political, economic or judicial measures and, only in extreme cases, military action.
Nigerian UN Peacekeeping soldier
Yes!, 1999
Measures Short of Military Action
• Sanctions– do not directly interfere with the capacity of a
domestic authority to operate.– often indiscriminate - need to avoid doing more
harm than good.– in Iraq sanctions are resulting in massive harm
to the civilian population.
Types of Sanctions
• Military– arms embargoes.– ending military cooperation and
training programs.
• Economic– financial sanctions targeting assets.– restrictions on income generating
activities.– aviation bans.
Types of Sanctions
• Political and Diplomatic– restrictions on diplomatic
representation.– restrictions on travel.– expulsion from international or
regional bodies.
The International Court of Justice
Disarm
ament and S
ecurity Centre
Military Action
• Should only occur in extreme situations.– what constitutes ‘extreme’ situations?
• The starting point should be the principle of non-intervention.– equivalent to the Hippocratic principle -
‘do no harm’.• Need to satisfy the threshold
conditions and precautionary principles.
Responsibility to Rebuild
• In the past:– responsibility to rebuild not
recognized.– exit of the interveners poorly
managed.– commitment to reconstruction
inadequate.– underlying problems that produced
the original intervention action not addressed.
The Responsibility to Rebuild
• Genuine commitment to reconstitute public safety and order needed if military intervention is taken.
• International and local partnerships -with progressive transferring of authority and responsibility to local authorities.
Responsibility to Rebuild
• True reconciliation is best generated by ground level reconstruction efforts.
• Requires more than purely diplomatic and military action:– creation or strengthening of national institutions.– monitoring elections.– promoting human rights.– providing for reintegration and rehabilitation and
development.
Responsibility to Rebuild
• Critical priorities to avoid resurgence of the conflict:– reconciliation and respect for human
rights of all populations. – political inclusiveness and national
unity.– repatriation and resettlement of
refugees and displaced persons.– reintegration of ex-combatants into
productive society.– domestic and international resources for
reconstruction and economic recovery.
Responsibility to Rebuild
Without an exit strategy for the intervening troops there are, at best, unsettling implications for the country and a possibility of discrediting even the positive aspects of the intervention itself.
Development with Justice
If you have come to help me you are wasting your time.
But - If your have come because
your liberation is bound up with mine then let us work
together.
Lilla Watson, Australia
Top Related