Whither the responsibility to protect? Humanitarian intervention and the 2005 World Summit

Bellamy, A. J. (2006) Whither the responsibility to protect? Humanitarian intervention and the 2005 World Summit. Ethics and International Affairs, 20 2: 143-169. doi:10.1111/j.1747-7093.2006.00012.x

Attached Files (Some files may be inaccessible until you login with your UQ eSpace credentials)
Name Description MIMEType Size Downloads
EHS12UQ82011.pdf Full text - not publicly available application/pdf 56.24KB 19

Author Bellamy, A. J.
Title Whither the responsibility to protect? Humanitarian intervention and the 2005 World Summit
Journal name Ethics and International Affairs   Check publisher's open access policy
ISSN 0892-6794
Publication date 2006-07-26
Sub-type Article (original research)
DOI 10.1111/j.1747-7093.2006.00012.x
Volume 20
Issue 2
Start page 143
End page 169
Total pages 27
Editor Christian Barry
Place of publication Hoboken, NJ, United States
Publisher Blackwell Publishing
Collection year 2006
Language eng
Subject C1
360105 International Relations
750701 Understanding international relations
Abstract At the 2005 World Summit, the world's leaders committed themselves to the "responsibility to protect", recognizing both that all states have a responsibility to protect their citizens from genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity and that the UN should help states to discharge this responsibility using either peaceful means or enforcement action. This declaration ostensibly marks an important milestone in the relationship between sovereignty and human rights but its critics argue that it will make little difference in practice to the world's most threatened people. The purpose of this article is to ask how consensus was reached on the responsibility to protect, given continuing hostility to humanitarian intervention expressed by many (if not most) of the world's states and whether the consensus will contribute to avoiding future Kosovos (cases where the Security Council is deadlocked in the face of a humanitarian crises) and future Rwandas (cases where states lack the political will to intervene). It suggests that four key factors contributed to the consensus: pressure from proponents of the International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty, its adoption by Kofi Annan and the UN's High Level Panel, an emerging consensus in the African Union, and the American position. Whilst these four factors contributed to consensus, each altered the meaning of the responsibility to protect in important ways, creating a doctrine that many states can sign up to but that does little to prevent future Kosovos and Rwandas and may actually inhibit attempts to build a consensus around intervention in future cases.
Keyword United Nations
Humanitarian intervention
Human rights
Q-Index Code C1
Q-Index Status Provisional Code
Institutional Status Unknown

Version Filter Type
Citation counts: Google Scholar Search Google Scholar
Created: Wed, 15 Aug 2007, 10:06:12 EST