Over the weekend, I watched the Great Decisions episode on the responsibility to protect (R2P). The episode consists of a conversation with Joe Volk (from the Friends Committee on National Legislation) and Monica Serrano (from the Global Centre for the Responsibility to Protect), among other experts, including Ban Ki Moon, who chime in on the matter.
The episode is a great primer on R2P and touches on a lot of the complexities of this so-called emerging norm. Basically the current state of R2P comes down to two paragraphs from the Outcome Document of the 2005 World Summit (downloadable here):
138. Each individual State has the responsibility to protect its populations from genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity. This responsibility entails the prevention of such crimes, including their incitement, through appropriate and necessary means. We accept that responsibility and will act in accordance with it. The international community should, as appropriate, encourage and help States to exercise this responsibility and support the United Nations in establishing an early warning capability.
139. The international community, through the United Nations, also has the responsibility to use appropriate diplomatic, humanitarian and other peaceful means, in accordance with Chapters VI and VIII of the Charter, to help to protect populations from genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity. In this context, we are prepared to take collective action, in a timely and decisive manner, through the Security Council, in accordance with the Charter, including Chapter VII, on a case-by-case basis and in cooperation with relevant regional organizations as appropriate, should peaceful means be inadequate and national authorities are manifestly failing to protect their populations from genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity. We stress the need for the General Assembly to continue consideration of the responsibility to protect populations from genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity and its implications, bearing in mind the principles of the Charter and international law. We also intend to commit ourselves, as necessary and appropriate, to helping States build capacity to protect their populations from genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity and to assisting those which are under stress before crises and conflicts break out.
Ban Ki Moon elaborated on the subject in a report last year, and the UN General Assembly subsequently debated the issue, passing the following resolution (downloadable here):
63/308. The responsibility to protect
The General Assembly,
Reaffirming its respect for the principles and purposes of the Charter of the United Nations,
Recalling the 2005 World Summit Outcome, especially paragraphs 138 and 139 thereof,
1. Takes note of the report of the Secretary-General and of the timely and productive debate organized by the President of the General Assembly on the responsibility to protect, held on 21, 23, 24 and 28 July 2009, with full participation by Member States;
2. Decides to continue its consideration of the responsibility to protect.
As the General Assembly resolution indicates, the subject is still under consideration, and as Ban Ki Moon notes in the episode, acceptance of R2P is not yet the official policy of the UN. The episode begins to grapple with many of R2P’s complexities. For example, R2P requires multilateral support and Security Council authorization for military intervention, but such agreement is difficult to secure. In fact, though many view the NATO intervention in the former Yugoslavia in the 1990’s as an example of the arising norm, the operation actually lacked international consensus and would not meet R2P’s current implementation parameters.
The episode grapples briefly with the issue of whether the international community could use R2P to justify intervention in the Israeli-Palestinian crisis. The moderator, Ralph Begleiter, alludes to the true reason why such an event would be impossible: the U.S. would veto it. The Security Council authorization requirement allows the P-5 (the five veto-wielding permanent Security Council members) significant control over R2P. The Israeli example is interesting, though the episode doesn’t address this example’s logical extension: R2P can never be used against any of the P-5. The power of the P-5 is an inescapable fact of our current international system, and Noam Chomsky spoke eloquently about the conundrum at last year’s General Assembly debate:
One way to mitigate this defect in the World Summit consensus would be to eliminate the veto — incidentally, in accord with the will of most Americans, who believe that the US should follow the will of the majority and that the UN, not the US, should take the lead in international crises. But here we run up against Adam Smith’s maxim [the “principal architects” of policy — in his day the “merchants and manufacturers” — make sure that their own interests are “most peculiarly attended to” however “grievous” the effect on others], which ensures that such heresies are unthinkable, as much so as applying R2P right now to those who desperately need protection but are not on the favored list of the powerful.
But, to paraphrase a familiar aphorism, perhaps our international system is the worst one that ever existed, except for all the others that have been tried. Despite many calls for Security Council reform, such as this one from Iran, reform efforts have failed to gain traction, undoubtedly for the reasons Chomsky cites. Regardless, read up on R2P here and, if you’re interested, order the Great Decisions DVD to get the RTP episode as well as many others.
