Member Sign In
International Coalition for the Responsibility to Protect
PDF Print E-mail
R2PCS Listserv
21 March 2007
Responsibility to Protect Engaging Civil Society
Web: www.responsibilitytoprotect.org
Email: [email protected] .org

In this issue: [R2P in the News; R2P and Darfur]

I. R2P in the News
1. COMMUNITY CALENDAR
2. THE MYTH OF CANADA AS A GLOBAL PEACEKEEPER
3. BIOGRAPHY OF KOFI ANNAN
II. R2P and Darfur
1. SLAUGHTER AND STARVATION
2. SUDAN: BAN KI-MOON CALLS FOR IALOGUE FROM ALL SIDES AS DAILY VIOLENCE CONTINUES
3. BETTER ANGELS FOR DARFUR
III. UN Issues statement endorsing R2P
1. U.N. LEGITIMACY ERODING LIKE FESTERING SORE
2. TEXT OF U.N DOCUMENT


I. R2P in the News
1. COMMUNITY CALENDAR
Contra Costa Times (California)
2 March 2007

() Human Rights Center -- "The Failure of Humanity in Preventing Genocides" lecture by Lt. Gen. Romo Dallaire, 7-9 p.m. March 13. General Dallaire led United Nations peacekeeping mission to Rwanda during 1994 genocide. Chevron Auditorium, International House, 2299 Piedmont Ave. Free. Tickets: www.Acteva.com/go/stop-genocide. Details: www.hrcberkeley.org.

Human Rights Center -- "Stopping Mass Atrocities: An International Conference on the Responsibility to Protect," 9 a.m.-5 p.m. March 14. Keynote address by International Crisis Group President Gareth Evans. Panelists from World Federalist Movement, Human Rights Watch, Council on Foreign Relations, and more. UC Berkeley, Barrows Hall, Lipman Room, eighth floor, Barrows Hall, UC Berkeley campus. Free. Register: www.Acteva.com/go/stop-genocide. Details: www.hrcberkeley.org. ()

Full text available:
http://www.contracostatimes.com/mld/cctimes/news/local/states/california/alameda_county/berkeley/16818010.htm

2. THE MYTH OF CANADA AS GLOBAL PEACEKEEPER
The Globe and Mail (Canada)
By Michael Valpy
28 February 2007

() Canada invented the doctrine of Responsibility to Protect that the UN accepted in 2005. Since then, successive Liberal and Conservative governments have stood by with their hands pretty much in their pockets while the doctrine glaringly failed its first test: The call for robust and, if necessary, uninvited UN military intervention to halt the genocide in the Darfur region of
Sudan.

() Should it reflect Canadian values and interests in advancing the concept of Responsibility to Protect - R2P, as it's abbreviated? If so, how does Canada persuade the world to embrace a doctrine that supersedes the principle of sovereignty of states, because Sudan does not want a UN force on its territory?

() The difficulty in getting R2P back on track at the UN is sizable, but experts such as Mr. Heinbecker and Prof. Hampson say it lies within Canada's capability - if the government has the will.

Many poor countries are afraid of it because they think it will be used against them. The U.S. did not help by at one point citing R2P as a rationale for invading Iraq, Mr. Heinbecker said. At the same time, several powerful countries, such as China, don't like it because it might interfere with their interests.

"R2P will be a hard sell," Prof. Hampson says. "And the selling gets harder post-Iraq. Darfur meets the test of R2P, it meets all the benchmarks, and it may make Afghanistan look like a picnic. No one wants to engage in what's becoming a regional conflict. No regional actor is willing to take the lead. It underscores the need for UN leadership."

Full text not available.

3. BIOGRAPHY KOFI ANNAN
The Sunday Telegraph (United Kingdom)
By Adam Lebor
25 February 2007

() Arguably, Annan's major achievement was the adoption of the principle of 'Responsibility to Protect', agreed by all member states. If governments persecute or cannot protect their own populations, the world may - in theory - intervene to save lives. But only in theory. ()

Full text not available.

II. R2P and Darfur

1. SLAUGHTER AND STARVATION
Deseret Morning News
By Elaine Jarvik
3 March 2007

() The Responsibility to Protect (R2P) doctrine adopted by the United Nations in 2005 affirmed that every sovereign government has a responsibility to protect its citizens from genocide, mass killing and massive, sustained human-rights violations. It affirmed that if a state is unable or unwilling to protect its citizens, that right and responsibility falls to the international community.

R2P specifies a series of political, economic and judicial approaches short of military intervention, although it permits military intervention as a last resort. Long before that becomes a necessity, Darfur advocates say, the United States needs to do everything possible to stop the killing of Darfurian civilians.

Full text available at:
http://deseretnews.com/dn/view/0,1249,660200175,00.html

2. SUDAN: BAN KI-MOON CALLS FOR IALOGUE FROM ALL SIDES AS DAILY VIOLENCE CONTINUES
UN News Centre
28 February 2007

Painting his grimmest picture yet of the humanitarian and security situation in Sudans strife-torn Darfur region, Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon has reiterated the urgent need for a ceasefire, calling for ialogue and negotiation from all sides, while the United Nations mission in the country today reported more abductions, hijackings and tribal fighting throughout the region.
In his latest report on Darfur to the Security Council, which was released today and covers the past three months through January, Mr. Ban in particular condemns the recent aerial bombings by the Government and the arrest and physical abuse of international humanitarian staff by local police last month.

am distressed by the deteriorating humanitarian and security situation on the ground. All parties must cease violent attacks on civilians. I particularly deplore the aerial bombings by Sudanese Government forces, which have expanded to new areas since 16 January, resulting in more civilian casualties and suffering, he writes.

appeal, in the strongest possible terms, to the Government of the Sudan and the other parties to desist from further hostilities, which destabilize the entire region and render peace an increasingly distant prospect. All parties must submit to dialogue and negotiation, and commit themselves to a non-military solution to the devastating conflict in Darfur.r
Mr. Ban says the increasing violence since November last year has also stretched the capacity of the African Union Mission in Sudan (AMIS), and he appeals for more international assistance to the Mission and also for the UN support packages to this operation. ()

Full text available at:
http://www.un.org/apps/news/story.asp?NewsID=21715&Cr=sudan&Cr1

2. BETTER ANGELS FOR DARFUR
Orlando Sentinel
By Justin M. Zorn
25 February 2007

() As students, activists and concerned citizens, we can seek to renew our moral leadership by pressuring the president and members of Congress to take such steps. We can also act directly on Darfur by telling our state legislators to support a forthcoming bill by state Sen. Ted Deutch of Delray Beach to divest Florida's public pension funds, the fourth largest in the nation, from companies underwriting Sudan's genocidal government. Join this movement by visiting www.sudandivestment.org.

What it may take to save Darfur and prevent any future genocide is an altered global system, one in which guilty governments like Sudan's cannot hide behind sovereignty, trying to justify wholesale slaughter as an internal matter. In Orlando, we should follow the lead of the city of Chicago and pass a city-council resolution affirming this principle of "Responsibility to Protect" and pass it on to key federal officials. Communities like ours can act meaningfully toward national credibility and a more compassionate world order.

Full text available at:
http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/opinion/orlnewvoices2507feb25,0,2705546.story?track=rss



III. UN Issues statement endorsing R2P

1. U.N. LEGITIMACY ERODING LIKE FESTERING SORE
By Ramesh Thakur
The Daily Yomiuri
21 May 2007

I have argued before in these pages that on balance, the world is a better place because of U.N. contributions to normative advancement, preventive diplomacy, peace operations, peacemaking and humanitarian relief and assistance missions.

The balance could tip in the other direction in the foreseeable future because the organization has been leaking legitimacy through long-festering sores. For example, sexual abuses by peacekeepers preying for more than a decade on the very civilians they were meant to protect has undermined the moral authority of the United Nations as the organization deploying and supervising peacekeeping operations. It is respected today as much for what it symbolizes as for what it actually does.

() With respect to the use of international force to avert or halt atrocity crimes inside state borders, the consensus is shifting away from the norm of nonintervention to the new norm of the responsibility to protect. But the sad fact is that while the doctrine has gained rapid acceptance normatively, it is yet to be translated into action operationally. The rhetoric-action gap is not due to an absence of fit cases for urgent international action.

There is deep skepticism among developing countries about the motive for intervention being disinterested humanitarianism and not self-serving commercial and geopolitical calculations. They also resent the double standards. In effect, the West is saying to the rest: The force you may use to quell internal dissent, insurgency and terrorism is not solely a matter of your judgment and discretion. The era of sovereign immunity from international accountability for internal use of force is gone. However, our use of force internationally is not subject to any international authorization, oversight or accountability. We will decide, solely as a matter of our judgment and discretion, when, where and how much force to use, and for how long.

Repeated U.S. assaults on U.N.-centered law governing the international use of force have undermined the norm of a world of laws, the efficacy of international law, and the United Nations' legitimacy as the authoritative validator of international behavior.

The most lethal force known to man is nuclear weapons. The biggest tension on this subject is between nonproliferation and disarmament. The five permanent members of the Security Council, collectively called the P-5, preach nonproliferation but practice consenting deterrence. If nuclear weapons did not exist, they could not proliferate. Because they do, they will. For the P-5 to insist that nonproliferation is an enforceable obligation while disarmament can be postponed indefinitely seriously compromises the authority of the Security Council as the enforcer of antinuclear norms.
With respect to the process for selecting the U.N. secretary general, the P-5 determine the short list. After several rounds of indicative balloting, Ban Ki Moon was the only one to escape the threat of a P-5 veto, and his choice was then ratified by the General Assembly by acclamation. He is the legally elected head of the organization. But does he command legitimacy? Having been given neither voice nor vote in his selection, why should the "international community" (countries and people) accept him as "their" leader and

Full text available at:
http://www.yomiuri.co.jp/dy/world/20070521TDY10001.htm

 

Browse Documents by Region:

International Coalition for the Responsibility to Protect
c/o World Federalist Movement - Institute for Global Policy
708 Third Avenue, Suite 1715, New York, NY 10017
Contact