![Sample our Politics & International Relations journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5947/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Politics-International-Relations.jpg"})
Abstract
This article seeks to dissect the doctrine of responsibility to protect, which consists of two other international law concepts, namely protection and responsibility, both long desired goals of international law. The article will discuss why this doctrine is not working properly. Here the focus is on the case of Syria; while the previous case of Libya was declared to be this doctrine ‘came of age’. Here the problem will be discussed based on the inherent contradiction in this doctrine's formulation, and the related weakness of international law. Since, when one speaks about responsibility to protect, the notion of ‘protection’ trumps the other one and many ask for more intervention, while the other component of this doctrine, ‘responsibility’, will be eclipsed. Thus it tries to depict the problem of inconsistent application of responsibility to protect in a more general pattern of international law, as this phenomenon is nascent in the sense of legal responsibility. In this regard, the article is based on interactional international law, which is more focused on practice, since this doctrine has not been firmly legally codified; this theory better suits us to portray the inner contradiction of responsibility to protect.
Notes on contributor
Heidarali Teimouri is an International Law PhD Candidate, School of Law University of Leeds. His thesis subject is: Responsibility to Protect and International Intervention in Libya in 2011.
Notes
1 Zifcak Spencer, ‘Is The Responsibility To Protect Dead? The Doctrine's Standing in the Wake Of Syria Massacre', in Responsibility to Protect in Theory and Practice: Papers Presented at the Responsibility to Protect in Theory and Practice Conference Ljubljana, eds. Vasilka Sancin and Maša Kovič Dine (Ljubljana: GV Založba, 2013), 254.
2 Paul R. Williams, J. Trevor Ulbrick, and Jonathan Worboys, ‘Preventing Mass Atrocity Crimes: The Responsibility to Protect and The Syria Crisis', Case Western Reserve University Journal of International Law 45, no. 1&2 (2012): 490.
3 Peter Hilpold, ‘Humanitarian Intervention: Is There a Need for a Legal Reappraisal?', European Journal of International Law 12, no. 3 (2001): 444.
4 Ibid., 453. Also look at Military and Paramilitary Activities in and against Nicaragua (Nicaragua v. United States of America), judgment 27 June 1986, ICJ, 206,207.
5 Alexandra Bohm, ‘Why Do We Care? A Critical Look at the Responsibility to Protect’ in Sancin and Dine, Responsibility to Protect in Theory and Practice, 143.
6 Carsten Stahn, ‘Responsibility to Protect: Political Rhetoric or Emerging Legal Norm?', American Journal of International Law 101, no. 1 (2007): 104.
7 To know more about the history of humanitarian intervention look at: Brendan Simms and D.J.B. Trim, eds., Humanitarian Intervention: A History (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2011).
8 Jutta Brunnée and Stephen J. Toope, ‘The Responsibility to Protect and the Use of Force: Building Legality?’ Global Responsibility to Protect 2, no. 3 (2010): 194–195.
9 Heather M. Roff, Global justice, Kant and the Responsibility to Protect: A Provisional Duty (London: Routledge, 2013), 10.
10 Brunnée and Toope, ‘The Responsibility to Protect and the Use of Force', 201.
11 Ibid., 206–207.
12 Stahn, ‘Responsibility to Protect', 108.
13 John Bolton 30 August 2005 Letter, http://www.humanrightsvoices.org/assets/attachments/documents/bolton_responsibility_to_protect.pdf. (accessed 12 January 2015).
14 Brunnée and Toope, ‘The Responsibility to Protect and the Use of Force', 194.
15 To read more about the interrelation between morality and institutionalization look at: Grant Marlier and Neta C. Crawford, ‘Incomplete and Imperfect Institutionalisation of Empathy and Altruism in the “Responsibility to Protect” Doctrine', Global Responsibility to Protect 5, no. 4 (2013): 397–422.
16 Stahn, ‘Responsibility to Protect', 115.
17 Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts; and its pending status to come into force after many revisions is the best example of problematic nature of responsibility notion in contemporary international law.
18 ‘Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts’, Draft 2001, art 40.
19 Stahn, ‘Responsibility to Protect', 115.
20 ‘Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts’, art 41.
21 ‘General Assembly World Summit Outcome', Summer 2005, UN Doc A/RES/60/1, para 139.
22 Stahn, ‘Responsibility to Protect', 120.
23 Vladimir S. Kotlyar, ‘“Responsibility To Protect” The Hopes and the Crash of an Illusion. Is there any Chance to Revive it?’, in Responsibility to Protect in Theory and Practice, eds. Sancin and Dine, 34.
24 Brunnée and Toope, ‘The Responsibility to Protect and the Use of Force', 206–207.
25 Report of the Secretary-General, ‘Implementing the Responsibility to Protect', 12 January 2009, UN Doc A/63/677, para 62.
26 Jutta Brunnée and Stephen J. Toope, Legitimacy and Legality in International Law: An Interactional Account (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010), 23.
27 Ibid., 33.
28 Ibid., 21, 30.
29 Ibid., 24.
30 Ibid., 24–25.
31 Brunnée and Toope, ‘The Responsibility to Protect and the Use of Force', 203.
32 Ibid., 204.
33 Carsten Stahn, ‘Between Law-breaking and Law-making: Syria, Humanitarian Intervention and “What the Law Ought to Be”’, Journal of Conflict and Security Law 19, no. 1 (2014): 47.
34 Spencer, ‘Is The Responsibility To Protect Dead?', 264.
35 Ibid., 255–257.
36 Ibid., 267–268.
37 Ibid., 268–269.
38 Ibid., 271.
39 ‘United Nations Security Council 6627th meeting', 4 October 2011, UN Doc S/PV.6627, 4.
40 Carsten Stahn, ‘Syria and the Semantics of Intervention, Aggression and Punishment', Journal of International Criminal Justice 11, no. 5 (2013): 957.
41 Stahn, ‘Between Law-breaking and Law-making', 27.
42 Stahn, ‘Syria and the Semantics of Intervention', 958.
43 Stahn, ‘Between Law-breaking and Law-making', 29.
44 Ibid., 34–35.
45 Stahn, ‘Syria and the Semantics of Intervention', 958.
46 To remind, one prominent reason for introduction of responsibility to protect by the ICISS Report in 2001 was states refrain from unilateral use of force after Kosovo crisis in 1999.
47 Stahn, ‘Syria and the Semantics of Intervention', 956.
48 Thykier Moller, ‘The R2P and the Sovereignty Game in the Security Council (UNSC): Syria Versus Libya', in Responsibility to Protect in Theory and Practice, eds. Sancin and Dine, 198–199.
49 Secretary-General Report of CW Investigation, http://www.un.org/disarmament/content/slideshow/Secretary_General_Report_ofCW_Investigation.pdf (accessed 3 February, 2014).
50 Ralf Trapp, ‘Elimination of the Chemical Weapons Stockpile of Syria', Journal of Conflict and Security Law 19, no. 1 (2014): 7.
51 Stahn, ‘Syria and the Semantics of Intervention', 956–957.
52 This Islamic group is regarded as a terrorist organization or/and in the eyes of some even as a quasi-government. For more idea about international legal status of IS look at: Joe Boyle, ‘Islamic State and the Idea of Statehood', BBC News Middle East, January 6, 2015. ‘United Nations Security Council Resolutions 2172 and 2178’, 26 August and 24 September 2014, UN Doc S/RES/2172 and S/RES/2178. Secretary General Remarks to Security Council's open debate on International Cooperation in Combating Terrorism and Violent Extremism, 19 November 2014, http://www.un.org/apps/news/infocus/sgspeeches/statments_full.asp?statID=2439#.VNH60WisV8E. (Accessed 4 February, 2015). ‘Transcript: President Obama's Speech on Combating ISIS and Terrorism', CNN, September 11, 2014. The League of Arab States Ministerial Council, ‘Safeguarding the Arab National Security and Suppression of Extremist Terrorist Groups', and ‘International Terrorism and Measures of Suppression', Res. no. 7804 – o.s. (142) – c. 3 – 07/09/2014 and Res. no. 7816 – o.s. (142) – c. 3 – 07/09/2014. And ‘Special Meeting of the European Council’, 30 August 2014, EUCO 163/14, 14–18.
53 To know more about IS violence and extremism look at: ‘Islamic State: Can its Savagery be Explained?', BBC News Middle East, 9 September, 2014, and Paul Wood, ‘Islamic State: Yazidi Women Tell of Sex-slavery Trauma', BBC News Middle East, 22 December, 2014.
54 Jonathan Marcus, ‘Will Obama's global anti-IS coalition work?', BBC News, September 14, 2014.
55 Stahn, ‘Syria and the Semantics of Intervention', 966–967.
56 Ibid., 968.
57 ‘Responsibility of States for Internationally Wrongful Acts', art 50.
58 As happened in case of the US occupation of Iraq since the country is still in turmoil.
59 Williams, Ulbrick, and Worboys, ‘Preventing Mass Atrocity Crimes', 490.
60 Stahn, ‘Responsibility to Protect', 109.
61 Stahn, ‘Syria and the Semantics of Intervention', 964.
62 ‘The responsibility to protect, including its potential for collective action, is increasingly supported by globally shared understandings.’ In Brunnée and Toope, ‘The Responsibility to Protect and the Use of Force’, 211.
63 Ibid., 212.