Protecting responsibly: The security council and the use of force for human protection purposes

Abstract

Introduction Since the turn of the century, the United Nations (UN) Security Council (UNSC) has become gradually more proactive in relation to the protection of civilians in armed conflict. This coincides with the adoption of the concept of the ‘responsibility to protect’ (R2P) by the 2005 World Summit, the largest-ever gathering of heads of state and government, and its reaffirmation by the UNSC in Resolution 1674 (2006),1 Resolution 1894 (2009),2 Resolution 2150 (2014)3 and a Rwandan Presidential Statement in 2013,4 as well as its application in relation to situations in Darfur (Sudan), African Great Lakes, Libya, Cote d’Ivoire, South Sudan, Somalia, Yemen, Mali, Central African Republic (CAR) and Syria. From hesitant beginnings in Sierra Leone and the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC), the UNSC has gradually moved human protection to the centre of UN peacekeeping, with a majority of its ongoing missions having protection mandates.5 These mandates were established under Chapter VII of the UN Charter and permit the use of ‘all necessary measures’ to protect civilians. This trend towards human protection as a core purpose of the UNSC and a more robust approach to protection accelerated markedly in early 2011. Since that time, the UNSC has authorised the use of force to protect populations in Libya and Cote d’Ivoire, which in both cases resulted in a change of government; mandated a UN mission (MINUSMA)6 to assist the government of Mali to protect the population from Tuareg/Islamist militia alongside a French deployment that has applied extensive coercive force; established an international intervention brigade in the DRC mandated to use force to protect civilians against M23 and other militia, but also ostensibly intended as an armed deterrent to Rwandan interference in the country’s east;7 and authorised a UN mission (MINUSCA)8 to use all means necessary (i.e. force if needed) to protect civilians in the CAR.9 The UNSC also responded quickly to the deterioration of the situation in South Sudan in late 2013 by authorising an unprecedented redeployment of peacekeeping forces to reinforce the beleaguered UNMISS10 mission there. These mandates and missions have not been without controversy. Critics complained that UN forces in Cote d’Ivoire and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO)-led mission over Libya exceeded their mandates to protect civilians and that the UNSC did not hold properly accountable the UN officials and states that assumed responsibility for discharging the UNSC’s mandates.