The United Nations Responsibility To Protect Civilians From Massive Human Rights Violations In Light Of The Intervention In The Libyan Crisis In 2011

The international community was criticized when it decided to intervene, as in Somalia, Bosniarnand Kosovo, and when it did not intervene as in Rwanda. It was against this background thatrnKofi Annan argued, in September 1999, in the defense of the individual sovereignty over staternsovereignty. He asked, ‘if humanitarian intervention is an unacceptable attack on sovereignty,rnhow can we respond to cases as Rwanda or Srebrenica?’ In this sense, with the recovery ofrnFrancis Deng’s 1996 “sovereignty as responsibility” concept, it would be possible to abrogaternthe categorical imperative of traditional sovereignty, allowing the international community tornintervene when the state fails in its responsibility to protect its people against genocide, ethnicrncleansing, crimes of war and against humanity.rnThe study looks at the creation, development and eventual adoption of the ‘responsibility tornprotect’ (R2P) norm, from an idea promulgated in the 1990s to the development of the norm,rnand to the eventual adoption of a heavily restricted yet poignant principle at the 2005 WorldrnSummit. There is considerable debate over the status and scope of the Responsibility tornProtect. On balance, most observers and states believe that it remains a political commitmentrnand has not yet acquired legal force. The purpose of this study is to critically examine the UN’srnresponsibility to protect civilians in light of the intervention in the 2011 Libyan crisis. Thernresponsibility to protect has been central in the discussion of how to deal with the Arab springrnrevolts that gave rise to civil war in Libya. In Libya, with the help of an UN authorized NATOrnintervention, the Gaddafi authoritarian regime ended and the former rebel forces are nowrnleading the transitional process. Taking in to account the events in Libya, many havernquestioned whether the concept of R2P was used not only to protect civilians, but also to fulfillrna desire, from the beginning of the mission, for regime change.rnHowever, the study argued that it was very difficult to enforce the very intents and objectivesrnof Resolution 1973, because it was obvious enough that Gaddafi was prepared to continue tornslaughter his people in a civil war to retain power. Thus, even if some argued that the NATOrnintervention in Libya acted beyond Resolution 1973, nevertheless, the study strongly arguedrnthat the intervening forces have indeed stopped Gaddafi from marching on Benghazi and savedrnthousands of lives.rnKeywords: Libya, UN Resolution, Civilians, the Responsibility to Protect

Get Full Work

Report copyright infringement or plagiarism