Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorJ. Bellamy, Alex
dc.date.accessioned2017-05-03T15:49:43Z
dc.date.available2017-05-03T15:49:43Z
dc.date.issued2006
dc.date.modified2013-12-19T22:50:31Z
dc.identifier.issn08926794
dc.identifier.doi10.1111/j.1747-7093.2006.00012.x
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10072/55231
dc.description.abstractAt 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.
dc.description.peerreviewedYes
dc.description.publicationstatusYes
dc.languageEnglish
dc.language.isoeng
dc.publisherWiley-Blackwell Publishing, Inc.
dc.publisher.placeUnited States
dc.relation.ispartofstudentpublicationN
dc.relation.ispartofpagefrom143
dc.relation.ispartofpageto169
dc.relation.ispartofissue2
dc.relation.ispartofjournalEthics and International Affairs
dc.relation.ispartofvolume20
dc.rights.retentionY
dc.subject.fieldofresearchInternational Relations
dc.subject.fieldofresearchPolitical Science
dc.subject.fieldofresearchApplied Ethics
dc.subject.fieldofresearchPhilosophy
dc.subject.fieldofresearchcode160607
dc.subject.fieldofresearchcode1606
dc.subject.fieldofresearchcode2201
dc.subject.fieldofresearchcode2203
dc.titleWhither the Responsibility to Protect? Humanitarian Intervention and the 2005 World Summit
dc.typeJournal article
dc.type.descriptionC1 - Articles
dc.type.codeC - Journal Articles
gro.date.issued2006
gro.hasfulltextNo Full Text
gro.griffith.authorBellamy, Alex J.


Files in this item

FilesSizeFormatView

There are no files associated with this item.

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

  • Journal articles
    Contains articles published by Griffith authors in scholarly journals.

Show simple item record