7 R2P

Question 1

Humanitarian Intervention

Spencer Zifcak, Responsibility to Protect (chapter 16 in Evans, 5thedition,30 pages)

Answer 1

The right to intervene in another country despite the soveriginity norm.

UN Charter 2(4) - to respects state soverignity
UN Charter 39 - UNSC can use force to respond a threat against international peace and security.
UN Charter 51 - Right to self-defence untill UNSC has taken countermeasures.

Not only military intervention. Embargo, sanctions, diplomatic sanctions.

Question 2

R2P

Responsibility to protect

Spencer Zifcak, Responsibility to Protect (chapter 16 in Evans, 5th edition, 30 pages)

Answer 2

Political framework agreed upon.
1. ICISS 2001.
2. World Summit 2005, paragraph 138, 139 and 40.

138 - pillar1-2
139 - pillar 3

To prevent a comission of mass atrocity crimes.

Aligns UNC C VII - Rome Statute 13b and 16.

Question 3

R2P history

Spencer Zifcak, Responsibility to Protect (chapter 16 in Evans, 5th edition, 30 pages)

Answer 3

Genocide and ethnic cleansing in Rwanda and the Balkans in the 1990s.

Question 4

ICISS

International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty

Spencer Zifcak, Responsibility to Protect (chapter 16 in Evans, 5th edition, 30 pages)

Answer 4

Published the R2P report in 2001 to find common ground about state soverignity and human rights protection.

Non state actors, previos head of state and scholors.
Also African scholars.

-> World summit 2005

Question 5

State soverignity vs. human rights

Spencer Zifcak, Responsibility to Protect (chapter 16 in Evans, 5th edition, 30 pages)

Answer 5

This is a core tension in international law and politics that R2P attempts to address.

Question 6

UN Charter 2(4)

Spencer Zifcak, Responsibility to Protect (chapter 16 in Evans, 5th edition, 30 pages)

Answer 6

State soverignity

Question 7

UN Charter VII

Spencer Zifcak, Responsibility to Protect (chapter 16 in Evans, 5th edition, 30 pages)

Answer 7

Allows to intervene despite state soverignity.
- Threat against international peace and security.

Question 8

Interventions with UNSC authority

Spencer Zifcak, Responsibility to Protect (chapter 16 in Evans, 5th edition, 30 pages)

Answer 8

Rwanda, Bosnia, Somalia

Question 9

Interventions without UNSC authority

Spencer Zifcak, Responsibility to Protect (chapter 16 in Evans, 5th edition, 30 pages)

Answer 9

Kosovo in 1999

Question 10

R2P 3 pillars

Spencer Zifcak, Responsibility to Protect (chapter 16 in Evans, 5th edition, 30 pages)

Answer 10

Repsonsibility to
1. Prevent (state itself)
2. React (with consent with the state)
3. Intervene (international community)

Question 11

World Summit Refferal

Spencer Zifcak, Responsibility to Protect (chapter 16 in Evans, 5th edition, 30 pages)

Answer 11

Ever since implemented, despite its a resolution, it has been reffered to - including UNSC, when making draft resolutions or resolutions.

Question 12

R2P customary law

Spencer Zifcak, Responsibility to Protect (chapter 16 in Evans, 5th edition, 30 pages)

Answer 12

Opinio juris: UNSC reffering and acting on it resolutions
UN SG issuing annual report on R2P

Challenges:
Lack of consistent practice (SC politiziced)
Disagrements of the scope of R2P (India ambassador)

Question 13

Mass atrocity crimes

Gregor P. Hofmann, Ten Years R2P –What Doesn’t Kill a Norm Only Makes It Stronger?, PRIF Report no. 133, 2015 (32 pages)

Answer 13

Crimes against humanity, war crimes and ethnical cleansing.

Gregor P. Hofmann, Ten Years R2P –What Doesn’t Kill a Norm Only Makes It Stronger?, PRIF Report no. 133, 2015 (32 pages)

Question 14

R2P as norm selectivity

Gregor P. Hofmann, Ten Years R2P –What Doesn’t Kill a Norm Only Makes It Stronger?, PRIF Report no. 133, 2015 (32 pages)

Answer 14

Concerns that R2P is applied inconsistently, often based on political considerations rather than objective criteria. Critics point to the Security Council’s inaction in some cases, like Syria, while intervening in others, like Libya, as evidence of selectivity.

Gregor P. Hofmann, Ten Years R2P –What Doesn’t Kill a Norm Only Makes It Stronger?, PRIF Report no. 133, 2015 (32 pages)

Question 15

Reforming the UNSC
G4

Karen Adams, Reforming Membership and Voting in the UN Security Council, October 2013, 4-9

Answer 15

Consists of Germany, India, Brazil, and Japan. Advocates for adding six permanent seats (including one for each G4 member and two for African states), four non-permanent seats, and limiting veto power

Question 16

Cold War UNSC paralyzed

Karen Adams, Reforming Membership and Voting in the UN Security Council, October 2013, 4-9

Answer 16

The Cold War rivalry between the US and the Soviet Union often led to deadlock in the Security Council. Veto.

Question 17

Vetoes Since R2P Endorsement

Answer 17

Instances veto has been used since the endorsement of R2P in 2005,
often by Russia and China to block resolutions concerning human rights abuses in countries like:

Myanmar, Zimbabwe, and Syria.

Question 18

Silent veto

Answer 18

Resolutions not even proposed due to a P5 political perferences.

Question 19

Advisory Opinion

Jennifer Trahan, Legal Limits to the Veto Power in the Face of Atrocity Crimes, 11 April 2019 (3 pages)

Answer 19

A not legal binding opinion from ICJ based on a request from UNSC, GA or other UN organs.

Question 20

Voluntary veto restraint

Jennifer Trahan, Legal Limits to the Veto Power in the Face of Atrocity Crimes, 11 April 2019 (3 pages)

Answer 20

Initiatives that ask that the permanent members of the Security Council voluntarily restrain their veto use in the face of genocide, crimes against humanity, and war crimes.

UK and France signed this initative.

Question 21

Genocide Convention

Jennifer Trahan, Legal Limits to the Veto Power in the Face of Atrocity Crimes, 11 April 2019 (3 pages)

Answer 21

1949. GA.
      Sates that are parties to this treaty are legally obligated to “prevent” genocide, meaning that they must use due diligence and their positions of influence to try to prevent genocide from happening

Question 22

Geneva Convention

Jennifer Trahan, Legal Limits to the Veto Power in the Face of Atrocity Crimes, 11 April 2019 (3 pages)

Answer 22

1949
A set of four treaties and three additional protocols that establish the standards of international law for humanitarian treatment in war.

Question 23

Due diligence

Jennifer Trahan, Legal Limits to the Veto Power in the Face of Atrocity Crimes, 11 April 2019 (3 pages)

Answer 23

The legal principle that requires states to take all reasonable steps to prevent harm to its population, the state it self and its territory within their jurisdiction or under their control.

Question 24

Options for Responding to Atrocities in Ukraine

Answer 24

Information Warfare

Legal Proceedings, supporting ICC work.

Economic Sanctions, the existing economic sanctions against Russia are significant, but the source argues that they should be strengthened

Diplomatic Sanctions: These sanctions can range from expelling diplomats to severing diplomatic ties completely. While some states have expelled Russian diplomats, no state has completely severed diplomatic relations.

Military Assistance: Providing Ukraine with the military assistance it needs to defend itself is seen as a vital aspect of fulfilling R2P.