State failure impacts international relations through the spill-over effects it has beyond the failed state. The international response to state failure: The case of Somalia attempts to answer the research question "Is the international response to the failed Somalia more concerned with security (i.e. the fight against terrorism and piracy) than with nation building/democratization or humanitarian aid (refugees, poverty)? This question is answered through descriptive-analytical research approach using the Neo-Realist theory within a globalised world. Concepts of legitimacy, authority and sovereignty in relation to the international response are explored where response takes the form of Intervention and humanitarian intervention that could be informed by the Responsibility to Protect (R2P) or go as far as nation building. Various annually published indices that examine and rank failed states are analysed which collectively and independently indicate that Somalia has been the number one failed state since 2008. Historically, the international response to Somalia prior to state collapse in 1991 forms the foundation to the response as well as accounting for the importance of complex internal clan politics. The background to how the international response has been, plays a key role in understanding where the international response‘s motives are positioned on scale of humanitarian versus security motives for intervention. The regional dynamics are explained through the Regional Security Complex (RSC). The security power political motives are seen through Anti-terror motives in a post 9/11 world and the various international responses to the different forms of attempts of interim governments and their opposition movements. Most notably, Al Shabaab, who formally merged with Al Qaeda in 2012, has been a focus point for the international response. The African Union (AU) mission in Somalia AMISOM is analysed from its humble beginnings to a force to be reckoned with. Due to the failure in Somalia for over 20 years, 14 per cent of its population form part of the influential Diaspora group. State building has emerged as one of the major international responses to state failure with the motive of avoiding nationwide humanitarian crisis. Yet the inaction of the past decade has lead to large spread famine in 2011. The security motive of regional and international players has overshadowed a pure humanitarian response in the past but the immensity of the crisis in 2011 has lead to a global humanitarian response. A new window of opportunity has presented itself with the appointment of the new president of the National Constituent Assembly (NCA) in September 2012. The international response to state failure has placed security first and has acted accordingly to limit the international economic and security effects of piracy, terrorism and refugee flows. Nation building has come second although, there have been attempts at achieving a uniform response to the failure in Somalia, neo realist real politik reigns. The ideal of a golden mean, where a balance is achieved between security and humanitarian motives, could only be achieved if Somalia starts addressing its internal issues that have caused and resulted from the failure, which is far from straightforward. / Dissertation (MA)--University of Pretoria, 2012. / Political Sciences / unrestricted

The North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (hereafter, NATO) invasion of Libya in 2011 demonstrated and revealed the operative logics and technologies of global coloniality. Global coloniality names the trans-historic expansion of colonial domination and the perpetuation of its effects in contemporary times. This thesis critically examines how coloniality of power was manifested in the invasion of Libya by NATO forces in 2011. Deploying a decolonial epistemic perspective, the thesis delves deeper into the invisible colonial matrices of power, and in the process exposing and unmasking the very conditions that made the invasion possible in the first place. The decolonial epistemic perspective combines historical and world systems analyses to shed light on the convergences of local histories and global designs in creating conflicts. At the centre of the concept of coloniality of power is control, expressed in four main levers of analysis, namely: control of authority, control of the economy, control of knowledge and subjectivity and control of gender and sexuality. At the centre of global colonial matrices of power, is the United Nations (UN), which is controlled by the few powerful states of the Global North with veto power. The UN is used to justify liberal imperial invasions. Libya just like Iraq before it, and Venezuela today, are victims of neo-liberal imperialist onslaught. What emerges in this thesis is how global coloniality has appropriated liberal discourses of liberal democracy and human rights to justify liberal imperialism. The main findings are that a Euro-North American-centric power configuration was challenged by Qaddafi’s introduction of the gold-backed dinar currency, the pursuit of acquiring a telecommunications satellite for information and knowledge-creation for Africa, Qaddafi’s rising popularity in Africa and the Global South, and Qaddafi’s conception and position on women-empowerment, thereby redefining the conception of gender and sexuality, which was antithetical to a Euro-North America-centric worldview. As a result, the delinquent Qaddafi had to be punished and eliminated. / Thesis (PhD)--University of Pretoria, 2020. / Political Sciences / PhD International Relations / Unrestricted

This study focuses on humanitarian intervention in Iraq with a special focus on Iraqi Kurdistan. The purpose of the study is to analyze humanitarian intervention from different perspectives, especially in political matters. Despite this, a reasonable selection process is needed as not all international political aspects are particularly relevant. There are aspects which, although closely linked to humanitarian intervention, do not need a detailed analysis due to the already extensive literature and the established nature of the relevant regulation which does not analyze much new information. The study aims to apply theories and concepts in an analysis of humantarian intervention by applying a theoretical model based on humanitarian intervention and the UN's policy process. The analysis will focus on three dimensions: content, organization and legitimacy. By exploring these dimensions, the study will examine and evaluate different aspects of the intervention, including the political arguments, the structure and functioning of the UN policy process, and the legitimacy and support for the intervention from different actors and the world community. The method used in the study is qualitative research to define humanitarian intervention which is heavily dependent on the theoretical model. The most important results of the analysis are that there are no standards for when the UN system for crisis management should be activated and that the political unity in the Security Council is not as strong as the principles express. Other results are that thispolitical field, especially the political decisions about international armed conflicts, has countless very interesting aspects. However, a detailed presentation of these aspects requires a more specific study dealing with this topic, rather than an essay on humanitarian intervention.

<p>This thesis was successfully defended on December 16th, 2013 at McMaster University.</p> / <p>In response to humanitarian crises within sovereign nation-states, many voices in global politics have begun to frame their arguments in terms of a responsibility to uphold basic human rights. The most prominent example of this theme is found in the idea of the responsibility to protect, an international framework for crisis response developed by an international commission and consolidated at the United Nations. A major challenge to this frame of thinking is the traditional disjuncture between the concept of ethico-political responsibility, on the one hand, and nation-state sovereignty on the other. A critical investigation of the ethical and political impulses articulated within the doctrine of the responsibility to protect demonstrates that much of the emergent consensus surrounding the responsibility to protect framework is premised on ideational and normative ambiguity. Part of the reason for this is the complexity of the idea of ‘responsibility’. This project seeks to explain some of the contestation of the responsibility to protect by first developing, and then applying, a conceptual framework that differentiates between monological impulses of ‘being responsible’ and more socially embedded practices situated within relational regimes of accountability and answerability.</p> / Doctor of Philosophy (PhD)

<p>Tio år efter konflikten i Rwanda har världen ännu en humanitär konflikt att handskas med. Konflikten i Darfur benämns som en efterföljd av FN: s misslyckande i Rwanda. Militär intervention vars syfte är att skydda den humanitära värden har länge varit omdiskuterad. Debatten om humantär intervention har på nytt aktualiserats, när det kommer till frågan om relationen mellan två folkrättsliga grundprinciper; våldsförbudet och skyddet för mänskliga rättigheter, bör sammanföras för att få en effektivare lösning och därmed eliminera all form av hot mot folkrätten. År 2001 lanserades ”Responsibility to protect” rapporten, som svar på Kofi Annans förmaning, om att världssamfundet har en skyldighet att skydda. Ändamålet med begreppet är att nå en konsensus som leder fram till att världssamfundet ska agera effektivare vid humanitära konflikter.</p><p> </p><p>Darfur konflikten eskalerade i samband med att de svarta bönderna gjorde uppror mot den sudanesiska regeringsmakten i början av 2003. Orsaken till den väpnade upproren utmynnar i att bönderna har under en längre tid känt sig illabehandlad. För att motverka revolten, svarade regeringen med att tillsätta Janjaweed gerillan, vilken med stöd från regeringen började bedriva etniskt resning i Darfur.</p> / <p> </p><p>Tio år efter konflikten i Rwanda har världen ännu en humanitär konflikt att handskas med. Konflikten i Darfur benämns som en efterföljd av FN: s misslyckande i Rwanda. Militär intervention vars syfte är att skydda den humanitära värden har länge varit omdiskuterad. Debatten om humantär intervention har på nytt aktualiserats, när det kommer till frågan om relationen mellan två folkrättsliga grundprinciper; våldsförbudet och skyddet för mänskliga rättigheter, bör sammanföras för att få en effektivare lösning och därmed eliminera all form av hot mot folkrätten. År 2001 lanserades "Responsibility to protect" rapporten, som svar på Kofi Annans förmaning, om att världssamfundet har en skyldighet att skydda. Ändamålet med begreppet är att nå en konsensus som leder fram till att världssamfundet ska agera effektivare vid humanitära konflikter.</p><p> </p><p>Darfur konflikten eskalerade i samband med att de svarta bönderna gjorde uppror mot den sudanesiska regeringsmakten i början av 2003. Orsaken till den väpnade upproren utmynnar i att bönderna har under en längre tid känt sig illabehandlad. För att motverka revolten, svarade regeringen med att tillsätta Janjaweed gerillan, vilken med stöd från regeringen började bedriva etniskt resning i Darfur.</p>

Tio år efter konflikten i Rwanda har världen ännu en humanitär konflikt att handskas med. Konflikten i Darfur benämns som en efterföljd av FN: s misslyckande i Rwanda. Militär intervention vars syfte är att skydda den humanitära värden har länge varit omdiskuterad. Debatten om humantär intervention har på nytt aktualiserats, när det kommer till frågan om relationen mellan två folkrättsliga grundprinciper; våldsförbudet och skyddet för mänskliga rättigheter, bör sammanföras för att få en effektivare lösning och därmed eliminera all form av hot mot folkrätten. År 2001 lanserades ”Responsibility to protect” rapporten, som svar på Kofi Annans förmaning, om att världssamfundet har en skyldighet att skydda. Ändamålet med begreppet är att nå en konsensus som leder fram till att världssamfundet ska agera effektivare vid humanitära konflikter.   Darfur konflikten eskalerade i samband med att de svarta bönderna gjorde uppror mot den sudanesiska regeringsmakten i början av 2003. Orsaken till den väpnade upproren utmynnar i att bönderna har under en längre tid känt sig illabehandlad. För att motverka revolten, svarade regeringen med att tillsätta Janjaweed gerillan, vilken med stöd från regeringen började bedriva etniskt resning i Darfur. / Tio år efter konflikten i Rwanda har världen ännu en humanitär konflikt att handskas med. Konflikten i Darfur benämns som en efterföljd av FN: s misslyckande i Rwanda. Militär intervention vars syfte är att skydda den humanitära värden har länge varit omdiskuterad. Debatten om humantär intervention har på nytt aktualiserats, när det kommer till frågan om relationen mellan två folkrättsliga grundprinciper; våldsförbudet och skyddet för mänskliga rättigheter, bör sammanföras för att få en effektivare lösning och därmed eliminera all form av hot mot folkrätten. År 2001 lanserades "Responsibility to protect" rapporten, som svar på Kofi Annans förmaning, om att världssamfundet har en skyldighet att skydda. Ändamålet med begreppet är att nå en konsensus som leder fram till att världssamfundet ska agera effektivare vid humanitära konflikter.   Darfur konflikten eskalerade i samband med att de svarta bönderna gjorde uppror mot den sudanesiska regeringsmakten i början av 2003. Orsaken till den väpnade upproren utmynnar i att bönderna har under en längre tid känt sig illabehandlad. För att motverka revolten, svarade regeringen med att tillsätta Janjaweed gerillan, vilken med stöd från regeringen började bedriva etniskt resning i Darfur.

LL.M. / Please refer to full text to view abstract

The 1648 Peace of Westphalia created an understanding of state sovereignty free from external interference that remained largely unaltered until the last century. The horrors of the Holocaust and the significant humanitarian crises of the 20th century have presented the international community with a new type of threat to international peace and security and have sparked an ongoing conversation about the limitations of traditional sovereignty. Russia has positioned itself as a firm supporter of a strict adherence to the Westphalian concept of sovereignty, but my thesis argues that Russians do not value this interpretation as much as they claim to, and that in fact Moscow recognizes that this definition is a thing of the past. I examine Russian actions surrounding the 2011 UN-sanctioned intervention in Libya and the ongoing conflict in Syria, particularly focusing on the major differences between Russian decision-making in the two cases. I analyze transcripts of Security Council meetings in order to demonstrate that there is far more to Russian actions in Syria than Moscow’s public position suggests, and I subsequently offer a number of alternative explanations for Russian decision-making surrounding Syria. These alternative explanations demonstrate that even the Russians, who have portrayed themselves as the great defenders of traditional state sovereignty, recognize the modern limitations to strict Westphalian sovereignty and understand that this traditional definition is a thing of the past. This conclusion is significant because in demonstrating that traditional sovereignty’s greatest champion acknowledges the modern shift in the concept, I prove that the departure from strict Westphalian sovereignty is not merely a theory, but a reality.

Submitted by Leda Lopes (ledacplopes@hotmail.com) on 2017-03-10T11:59:04Z No. of bitstreams: 2 license_rdf: 0 bytes, checksum: d41d8cd98f00b204e9800998ecf8427e (MD5) Bruna_Cavallari_ Dissertação.pdf: 1150900 bytes, checksum: 8338685846dae5d0d61b1adb5abb5576 (MD5) / Approved for entry into archive by Aline Batista (alinehb.ufpel@gmail.com) on 2017-03-10T19:24:34Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 2 license_rdf: 0 bytes, checksum: d41d8cd98f00b204e9800998ecf8427e (MD5) Bruna_Cavallari_ Dissertação.pdf: 1150900 bytes, checksum: 8338685846dae5d0d61b1adb5abb5576 (MD5) / Approved for entry into archive by Aline Batista (alinehb.ufpel@gmail.com) on 2017-03-10T19:26:46Z (GMT) No. of bitstreams: 2 license_rdf: 0 bytes, checksum: d41d8cd98f00b204e9800998ecf8427e (MD5) Bruna_Cavallari_ Dissertação.pdf: 1150900 bytes, checksum: 8338685846dae5d0d61b1adb5abb5576 (MD5) / Made available in DSpace on 2017-03-10T19:26:55Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 2 license_rdf: 0 bytes, checksum: d41d8cd98f00b204e9800998ecf8427e (MD5) Bruna_Cavallari_ Dissertação.pdf: 1150900 bytes, checksum: 8338685846dae5d0d61b1adb5abb5576 (MD5) Previous issue date: 2016-09-23 / O fim da Guerra Fria trouxe mudanças na agenda da segurança internacional: escoamento de armas do Norte para o Sul Global, o surgimento das Novas Guerras, o fortalecimento dos Direitos Humanos, o aumento do número de democracias formais e um novo tipo de intervencionismo. Diante de questionamentos empíricos e teóricos diante de crises humanitárias de grandes proporções, a comunidade internacional foi instigada a encontrar uma harmonização entre os conceitos de soberania e Direitos Humanos. Assim, o preceito da “Responsabilidade de Proteger” surgiu e ganhou relevância na agenda de segurança internacional e nos meios políticos e acadêmicos. O objeto desta dissertação, portanto, configura-se para além de uma ideia teórica e normativa, operando concretamente no ambiente internacional através das intervenções humanitárias. Desta forma, questiona-se em que medida a sub-agenda da “Responsabilidade de Proteger” reflete as relações geopolíticas entre o Norte e o Sul Global, entre os anos 2005 e 2015. Compreendendo esta divisão Norte/Sul para além de aspectos somente geográficos e, considerando a complexidade do sistema internacional frente a classificações e divisões demonstrou-se que a “Responsabilidade de Proteger” trouxe pouca inovação prática ao cenário internacional e perpetua as assimetrias de poder entre o Norte e o Sul Global. / The end of the Cold War brought changes in the agenda of international security: flow of weapons North to the Global South, the emergence of the New Wars, the strengthening of human rights, increasing the number of formal democracies and a new type of interventionism. In the face of empirical and theoretical questions facing humanitarian crisis of major proportions, the international community was instigated to find a compromise between the concepts of sovereignty and human rights. Thus the precept of "Responsibility to Protect" emerged and gained relevance in the international security agenda and political and academic circles. The object of this paper therefore sets itself apart from a theoretical idea and rules, operating specifically in the international environment through humanitarian interventions. Thus, we question to what extent the sub-agenda of "Responsibility to Protect" reflects geopolitical relations between the North and the Global South, between 2005 and 2015. Understanding this North / South divide beyond only geographical aspects and considering the complexity of the international system against classifications and divisions demonstrated that the "Responsibility to Protect" brought little practical innovation to the international scene and perpetuates the power asymmetries between the North and the Global South

The concept of humanitarian interventions has seen increased interest especially since the end of the Cold War. During the last two decades, humanitarian interventions have been at the centre of the emerging doctrine of the responsibility to protect. Through collecting and analysing the United Nations documents and historical experience, this thesis concludes that within contemporary representation of the humanitarian interventions, inaction is not a viable answer to mass violations of human rights. However, as the case of Darfur shows, this renewed commitment towards collective action has not been translated into actions yet. The practice of humanitarian interventions and the role of the United Nations need to be consolidated so that the inconsistency and selectivity objections are eradicated.