From Humanitarian Intervention to the Responsibility to Protect
John-Mark Iyi2014, The Responsibility to Protect (R2P)
Sign up for access to the world's latest research
Abstract
The Legality and Legitimacy of Using Armed Force for the Protection of Strangers-From Humanitarian Intervention to Responsibility to Protect The ceaseless State-made humanitarian atrocities in the past decades toll the bell for the whole international community to take a responsibility. The traditional doctrine of humanitarian intervention encourages States or States groups to use armed force in a foreign territory for the protection of civilians of the targeted State. This doctrine has lived through a long history of international relations, from an age when States-resorting-to-war was legal to the time when the use of force is generally prohibited by international law. The legality of humanitarian intervention is quite controversial under the modern international law since 1945. On the one hand, the UN Charter lays down strict rules of lawful use of force; on the other hand, State practice of humanitarian intervention in the new era always lead to intense debate about whether humanitarian considerations can serve as a justification for military intervention in a sovereign State. However, hardly there is a universal consensus among States and scholars on this question. After the Cold War, a new form of humanitarian intervention, authorized by the UN Security Council, comes into the cause of international society, which is generally recognized as a lawful use of force. In the beginning of the new millennium, the emerging concept of Responsibility to Protect, which inherits the core spirit of humanitarian intervention-using armed force for the protection of strangers, has been quickly recognized by most States. This paper is going to assess the legality of humanitarian intervention by examine both the treaty laws and customary international law. Also, it attempts to address the legitimacy issue of using armed force for the protection of strangers without the Security Council authorization, by going through the changing position of the major States in this regard, especially those which always against. Keywords sovereignty, human rights, use of force, Article 2(4), customary international law, State practice, opinio juris, R2P, humanitarian intervention xiv 1 Chapter 1: Introduction Starting from March 2011, the Syrian conflict, ignited by the government's bloody repression of largely non-violent protests, has entered its fifth year. 1 The Syrian government forces and pro-government militia, as well as armed rebel groups, have committed massive crimes against humanity and war crimes since the conflict broke up. Till April 2014, approximately 200,000 civilians have been documented killed and the death toll is still accumulating day by day. 2 In its fifth year, the Syrian crisis remains unsolved: The fighting is continuing between the warring parties; the civilian population is still suffering; and the perpetrators are shielded from accountability. The United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) described the deteriorating Syrian situation as-a conflagration of an unparalleled scale and magnitude‖. 3 Responding to the severe security situation in Syria, in April 2012, the United Nations dispatched a United Nations Supervision Mission in Syria (UNSMIS) 4 to monitor a cessation of armed violence, and to monitor and support the full implementation of the Envoy's sixpoint proposal, which was issued with the support of the former Secretary-General Kofi Annan. 5 However, in the mandated period of UNSMIS, the six-point proposal was set aside by all the parties and the violence in Syria escalated from civilian unrest to civil war. 6 Considering the significant and rapid deterioration of the humanitarian situation in Syria during the past three years, in February 2014, the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) passed Resolution 2139, 7 demanding the Syrian authorities and other warring parties to allow humanitarian access in Syria. Due to the absence of cooperation from both the Syrian authorities and the opposite parties, this resolution has yet to make a meaningful difference in 1 This paper only covers facts before its finished date in May 2015.
