24th of November, 5th period Wakana, YuChi Hu, Nico, Yuriko Chapter 1-4

CONTENTS Introduction: What’s R2P? The Policy Challenge The Responsibility to Protect The Responsibility to Prevent The Responsibility to React

What’s R2P? Report of International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty (ICISS) “right to humanitarian intervention” The responsibility to prevent, react, rebuilt Prevention is the single most important dimension of the responsibility to protect 6 criteria - Large scale loss of life Large scale ‘ethnic cleansing’ Right intention Last resort Proportional means Reasonable prospects

The Intervention Dilemma “Humanitarian Intervention” has been controversial both when it happens, and when it has failed to happen. Four cases: Rwanda, Kosovo, Bosnia, Somalia Basic lines in the contemporary policy debate: - not intervening enough - much too often - coercive intervention are effective - misuse of precedent loom much larger - human rights trumps state sovereignty - big power manipulate human rights

Establishment of ICISS 1999 September the UN General Assembly “find common ground in upholding the principle of the Charter, and acting in defence of our common humanity” - Kofi Annan, the UN Secretary-General 2000 September ICISS was established try to develop a global political consensus on how to move from polemics Government, intergovernmental, NGOs, civil society Large number of conferences and seminars

Change: New Security Issues The UN members: 51 (1945) to 193(2014) New voices, perspectives, interests, experiences, and aspirations Institutions e.g. the International Criminal Tribunal, UNHCR NGOs, media, and academic factors Change: New Actors end of the Cold War has been a new emphasis on democratization, human rights and good governance BUT… internal war or civil conflict Recourses, plunder, More complex and lethal by modern technology, communications, and weapons Vulnerability of civilians vulnerability of government

Change: New Security Issues Western view: a set of discrete and unrelated crises occurring in distant and unimportant regions Dilemmas: humanitarian intervention? Building a stable order after intervention Unfair cover by media Uncooperative strong power Arms, money from developed world Civil conflicts in developing countries Terrorism, refugees, drugs, disease, organized crime

New Demands and Expectations “human rights” become a mainstream in international law and responsibility of international relations → The Universal Declaration of Human Rights the universal jurisdiction “human security” include human rights and human dignity must be one of the fundamental objections of modern international institutions new opportunity and capacity for common action

The Implications for State Sovereignty All the states are equally sovereign under the international law (the UN Charter, Article 2.1) Dual responsibly externally: to respect the sovereignty of other states internally: to respect the dignity and basic rights of all the people within the state The Meaning of Intervention Action taken against a state or its leader, without its or their consent, for purposes which are claimed to be humanitarian or protective × “humanitarian intervention” → “military intervention” for human protection purposes “the responsibility to protect”

Responsibility to Protect Four basic objectives for any new approach to intervention on human protection 1. to establish clearer rules, procedures and criteria for deterring whether, when and how to intervene 2. to establish the legitimacy of military intervention when necessary and after all other approaches have failed 3. to ensure that military intervention, when it occurs, is carried out only for the purposes proposed, is effective, and is undertaken with proper concern to minimize the human costs and institutional damage that will result 4. to help eliminate, where possible, the causes of conflict when enhancing the prospects for the durable and sustainable peace   Instead of arguing about “the right to intervene” they prefer to talk about it as “responsibility to protect”

Norm of Non-intervention Externally: strengthen the legal identity of a state in international law + sovereignty is considered equal Internally: right for the state to make authoritative decisions with regard to the people and resources within their territory, but the authority is not regarded as absolute A condition of a state's sovereignty: must respect others states sovereignty. The UN Charter acknowledged the right to self-defense.

Organizing Principle of the UN System Being a member of UN = final symbol of independent sovereign statehood Three Goals: State Building, Nation Building, and Economic Development The UN is dedicated to maintenance of international peace and security Problem: Conflicts today are internal Main Difficulty: Balance between maintaining international peace & security with the idea of sovereignty The Security-General approaches sovereignty in two notions 1. the state = traditional way 2. people and individuals = empowerment of people individually and collectively  

Sovereignty as Responsibility As member sign the Charter, they are also agreeing to accept the responsibilities of membership. A necessary re-characterization: from sovereignty as control to sovereignty as responsibility Significances of Sovereignty as responsibility 1. Responsibility of protecting the safety and lives of citizens and promoting their welfare 2. Responsibility to the citizens internally and international community through UN 3. Accountability for acts of commission and omission

Human Rights Human Security New standards of conduct UN Charter Article 1.3 “promoting and encouraging respect for human rights and for fundamental freedoms for all without distinction as to race, sex, language or religion The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948) = embodies the moral code, political consensus, and legal synthesis of human rights The two Covenants of 1966 = proclaim human rights norm as a fundamental principle of international relations   Most recent advances = development of humanitarian law Human rights law is approaching universal justice (justice without boarders) Human Security Traditional narrow perception: territorial security and security through armaments Human security: security of people physical safety economic and social well-being respect for their dignity and worth as human being protection of human rights and fundamental freedoms

Emerging Practice Commission's point of view for an emerging guiding principle can be termed as “the responsibility to protect” Human protection purposes is supportable when major harm to civilians occurs and the state is unable or unwilling to end the harm The emerging guiding principle is in favor of military intervention. The Commission believes that there is a strong bias against military intervention in the UN Charter, but they suggest that it is not regarded as absolute when decisive action is required.

Shifting the Terms of the Debate Traditional language of Intervention Debate, “right to intervene” is unhelpful 1. focus attention on the claims + rights + prerogatives of intervening states > potential beneficiaries 2. does not take into account the need for preventive effort or follow assistance 3. favors intervention before the debate has even begun New Perceptions of R2P to evaluate issues from the point of view of those who is seeking or needing support it acts as a bridge between the sovereignty and international community also include “the responsibility to prevent and rebuild”

Shifting the Terms of the Debate The Commission suggests that the domestic authority is best placed to prevent problems, as well as to deal with problems when they occur When a particular state is unable or unwilling to protect, the responsibility also lies in broader community of states The action for R2P should include a wide range of assistance options and responses, in extreme cases, military intervention. A necessary step: questions of legitimacy, authority, operational effectiveness, and political will

A Commitment to Prevent Responsibility to protect implies a responsibility to prevent. (3.1) Whose responsibility? Immediate responsibility falls on the sovereign states and their commitment to ensure conflict prevention (3.2) The necessity of international support (3.3) Commitment to prevent legitimizes intervention when required (3.4) Efforts to increase conflict prevention UN General Assembly and Security Council resolutions on conflict prevention and improved effectiveness (3.5) Expansion of IGOs and NGOs in conflict prevention to expand in the 1990s (3.6)

A Commitment to Prevent Challenges to prevention efforts Major preventative resources are controlled by sovereign states (3.7) Gap between preventative rhetoric and financial and political support. Particularly among developing countries. (3.8) Effective preventive measures require three essential conditions. (3.9) There has to be knowledge of the fragility of the situation and the risks associated with it. (“early warning”) An understanding of the policy measures available that are capable of making a difference. (“preventative tool box”) A willingness to apply those measures. (“political will”)

A Commitment to Prevent Challenges to prevention efforts Major preventative resources are controlled by sovereign states (3.7) Gap between preventative rhetoric and financial and political support. Particularly among developing countries. (3.8) Effective preventive measures require three essential conditions. (3.9) There has to be knowledge of the fragility of the situation and the risks associated with it. (“early warning”) An understanding of the policy measures available that are capable of making a difference. (“preventative tool box”) A willingness to apply those measures. (“political will”)

Early Warning and Analysis From early warning to timely response (3.10) Need for more official resources devoted to early warning and analysis (3.10-3.12): So far, early warning has proven inefficient. Multiplicity of variables associated with root causes of conflict and the complexities of their interactions Absence of reliable models for predicting conflicts Perennial problem of securing accurate information.

Early Warning and Analysis Rise of new NGOs specializing in conflict early warning UN role as international beacon for early warning. (3.14- 3.17) UN Charter Article 99 Efforts to improve the UN’s information gathering and analytical capacities. (Report of the Panel on United Nations Peace Operations) Establishment of a special unit enhancing Security- General’s provision of timely and accurate information. Increased inclusion of regional actors with relevant expertise is essential

Root Cause Prevention Efforts UN Charter, Article 55 (3.18) Prevention needs to include solutions to international economic, social, and health issues; international, cultural, and educational cooperation; and universal respect for human rights. Identifying underlying “root” causes of poverty, political repression, and uneven distribution of resources. (3.19) The inherent need for open communication between assisted countries and the assisting countries/regions (3.20) Several dimensions of root cause prevention Addressing political needs and deficiencies Tackling economic deprivation and lack of economic opportunities (3.21) Strengthening legal protections and institutions Reforming military and state security service sectors

Direction Prevention Efforts (“preventative tool box”) Defining Direct Prevention: Direct prevention as a final resort measure to make it unnecessary to employ directly coercive measures against a state. (3.25) Political and diplomatic direct prevention measures (3.26) Economic direct prevention measures (3.27) Promise of new funding/investments, or favorable trade terms. Threats of trade/financial sanctions, withdrawal of investments, or a curtailment of aid Legal direct prevention measures (3.28-3.31) Offering mediation, arbitration, or adjudication Threatening to apply international legal sanctions. Specialist Tribunals International Criminal Court Geneva Conventions Others?

Direction Prevention Efforts (“preventative tool box”) Military direct prevention measures (3.32) Stand-off reconnaissance (ex. UNPREDEP in Macedonia) Extreme cases -- the threat to use forces Media’s role in prevention (3.38) Alerting the international community and policy makers Problem of accepting international preventative measures (3.34-3.35) Slippery slope of preventative measures Risk of internal conflict (rebellion, succession)

Looking Forward Prescriptions for more effective prevention efforts (3.36-3.37) Improved coordination between NGO and IGO actors The importance of an operational strategy; a lead player to manage multi-actor prevention Creation of unrestricted UN development funds Prescriptions for more effective prevention efforts (3.39) Inclusion of conflict prevention in policies at the national, regional, and international levels Accountability International encouragement, support and reward of good conflict prevention behavior by fragile, conflict-prone states Changing the norm From culture of reaction to culture of prevention

The Responsibility to React Interventionary measures are required when a certain state is unable/unwilling to subside the situation and preventive measures fail to resolve it. In the case of reaction , less intrusive and coercive measures should always be considered before more coercive and intrusive ones are applied.(4.1) There should be tough threshold conditions to satisfy before contemplating military intervention.(4.2) In addition to threshold conditions there must be additional precautionary principles to be satisfied.

Measures short of Military Action Coercive measures short of military intervention ought first to be examined (4.3) 　ーpolitical, economic and military sanctions Why sanctions are better?(4.4) ◎Sanctions inhibit the state’s power to interact with the 　outside world. × Sanctions can not physically prevent the state from carrying out actions within its borders. Military intervention, on the other hand, directly interferes with the power of domestic authority, and can effectively displaces them. ⇒However the use of deadly force accompanies inherent risks.

Non-military measures Need extreme care to avoid doing more harm than good ⇒negative impact on civilian population should be avoided Economic sanctions have been increasingly discredited in recent years(4.5) ⇒the hardships exacted upon civilian population are disproportionate to the impact on the principal players. Sanctions that target leadership groups and security organizations responsible for gross human rights violations　are becoming important alternatives & drawing attention. Three different areas have been focused in targeting sanction 　ーMilitary 　ーEconomic 　ーPolitical/diplomatic

Targeted Sanction Military area 〜Arms embargoes〜 ーStop the selling of military equipment & spare parts ーEnding military cooperation and training programmes Economic Area　〜Restricting supply〜 ーFinancial sanctions on certain part/people of the states 　・foreign assets 　・rebel movement / terrorist organization 　・Individual and its members (i.e. family) ーRestrictions on income generating activities, which are 　 often the principal motivation for the conflict. ( oil, diamonds, drugs etc.) ーRestriction on access to petroleum products ⇆it may have devastating impact on innocent civilians ーAviation bans

Targeted Sanction Political and Diplomatic area ーRestrictions on diplomatic representation ( expulsion of staff) ーRestrictions on travel against specific leaders, individuals and their families ーSuspension of membership or expulsion from international/ regional bodies ーRefusal to admit a country to membership of a body

The Decision to Intervene The responsibility to react may involve military action only when the situation is extreme and regarded exceptional. ⇒Again, the principle of non-intervention is of the top priority Non-interference rule protects both governments and its people, enabling societies to maintain their own culture. Military intervention ・All order within a state has broken down ・Massacre/genocide/ethnic cleansing on a large scale Non-interference ・Intervention to domestic affairs destabilize the order of states ・Rule against intervention encourages states to solve their own problems.

Six Criteria for Military Intervention Just Cause (4.18~4.31) ︎Large scale loss of life, actual or apprehended, with genocidal intent or not, which is the product either of deliberate state action, or state neglect or inability to act, or a failed state situation Large scale threatened or actual loss of life defined by the 1948 Genocide Convention Situations of state collapse and the resultant exposure to mass starvation/civil war. State concerned is either unwilling or unable to cope, or call for assistance in overwhelming natural/environmental catastrophes and significant loss of life is seen. ︎Large scale “ethnic cleansing” actual or apprehended, whether carried out by killing forced expulsion, acts of terror or rape. The threat or occurrence of large scale loss of life Crimes against humanity and violations of the laws of war defined in Geneva Conventions& Additional Protocols Different manifestations of “ethnic cleansing” including the killing of certain group members, rape women of a particular group, terror designed to force people flee.

Situations excluded from “just cause” conditions are… Systematic racial discrimination, or the systematic imprisonment or other repression of political opponents ⇒Short of outright killing or ethnic cleansing Population desiring a democratic regime is denied its democratic rights by a military take-over. The use of military force by a state to rescue its own nationals on foreign territory ⇒should be supported by a combination of Article 51 and the general provisions of Chapter VII of UN Charter. The Question of Evidence ・It is essential to obtain fair and accurate information to prove that the situation meet the criteria presented. ・Those evidence should come from a universally respected and impartial non- governmental source.　Ex)Red Cross(ICRC), reports prepared in UN organs/agencies operations ・When the existence of the conditions that requires intervention is in question, Security Council or the Secretary-General sometimes send an independent special fact-finding mission, in order to obtain accurate information.

Other Precautionary Criteria Right Intention (4.33~4.36) The primary purpose of the intervention must be to halt or avert human suffering. There are several ways to ensure that the “right intention” criterion is satisfied. →Whether military intervention take place on a collective/multilateral →To what extent does the intervention actually support people in the situation? →Is the opinions of other countries taken into account ? Last Resort (4.37~38) The responsibility to react can only be justified when the responsibility to prevent is fully discharged. Proportional Means (4.39~4.40) The scale, duration and intensity of the planned military intervention should be the minimum necessary for improving the humanitarian objective in question. Reasonable Prospects(4.41~4.43) Military action should be taken only when it is likely to succeed in halting or averting the atrocities or suffering that triggered the intervention in the first place.

Thank you for paying attention 