År 2005 enades FN’s medlemsländer om ett initiativ vid namn Responsibility to protect. Initiativet baserades på tanken att en stats suveränitet inte är ett privilegium utan ett ansvar och syftade till att förhindra brott mot civilbefolkningar. Brott i form av folkmord, krigsbrott, brott mot mänskligheten och etnisk rensning.Den 17 mars 2011 röstade FN’s säkerhetsråd igenom resolution 1973. Det innebar att en internationell koalition ledda av NATO upprättade en no fly zone över Libyen i syfte att skydda civilbefolkningen från Ghadaffiregimens övergrepp. Detta var första gången som FN och det internationella samfundet motiverat en militär intervention utifrån just Responsibility to protect. Det svenska bidraget till den internationella styrkan bestod av upp till åtta stycken JAS 39 Gripen med personal som endast fick bekämpa luft hot, alltså inte mål på marken. År 2002 när den svenska riksdagen för första gången beslutade att skicka en svensk militär styrka till Afghanistan förelåg inga liknande restriktioner gällande nyttjandet av vapen från de svenska soldaterna.Uppsatsen skall söka svar på huruvida den svenska insatsen i Afghanistan motiverades med samma värderingar som den i Libyen. Detta i syfte att kartlägga och problematisera Responsibility to protects betydelse för det svenska deltagandet i militära insatser. Det kommer genomföras via en kvalitativ, idékritiskt klassificerande textanalys av de riksdagsdebatter som förelåg insatserna med fokus på om värderingar från Responsibility to protect kan spåras i argumentationen.Resultatet är inte helt entydigt men argument med tydlig anknytning till Responsibility to protect påträffas i samtliga debatter som undersökts. Det går även att utröna en förändring i hur riksdagsledamöterna argumenterar för ett svenskt deltagande i en militär insats utomlands före, respektive efter, införandet av Responsibility to Protect. / In the year of 2005 the United Nations decided on an initiative called the Responsibility to Protect. The initiative was based on the thought that the sovereignty of a state isn’t a right, but a privilege. Its purpose was to help prevent crimes against the civilian population. Crimes like genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity and ethnic cleansing.On march 17 2011 the UN security council authorized resolution 1973 which meant that an international NATO lead coalition could establish a no fly zone over Libya. This was done in order to protect the civilian population of Libya from the atrocities and assaults from the Gadhafi regime. This was the first time that the UN and the international community performed a military intervention motivated by the Responsibility to Protect. The Swedish contribution consisted of a force of up to eight JAS 39 Gripen, with personnel that were only authorized to engage targets in the sky, not on the ground. In 2002 the Swedish parliament decided to contribute with Swedish soldiers to Afghanistan. That time with the authorization to use deadly force if they needed to.This essay shall try and answer whether or not the Swedish military operation in Afghanistan was motivated by the same values as the one in Libya. This will be done in order to structure and problematize the concept of the Responsibility to Protect and how it may affect the Swedish contributions to international military interventions. This will be performed through a qualitative analysis of the protocols from the Swedish parliament that authorized and motivated the Swedish operations. The essay will focus on finding traces of values from the Responsibility to Protect from the arguments in the protocols.The results are not crystal clear, but arguments with a distinct connection to the Responsibility to Protect are found in all the protocols that are analyzed. The results of the analysis show a change of patterns in the way the Swedish parliamentarian’s debate for a Swedish contribution in international military operations since the Responsibility to Protect was initiated.

The aim of this thesis is to discuss the concepts of humanitarian intervention and the responsibility to protect (R2P), and; to investigate how best to apply the concepts in the face of humanitarian crises, in order to address concerns about their implementation. The failure of the Security Council to react to grave human rights abuses committed in the humanitarian crises of the 1990s, including Iraq (1991), Somalia (1992), Rwanda (1994), Bosnia (1993-1995) Haiti (1994-1997), and Kosovo (1999),triggered international debatesabout: how the international community should react when the fundamental human rights of populations are grossly and systematically violated within the boundaries of sovereign states, and; the need for a reappraisal of armed humanitarian intervention. Central to the debate was whether the international community should continue to adhere unconditionally to the principle of non-intervention enshrined in Article 2(7) of the UN Charter, or take a different course in the interest of human rights. The debate culminated in the establishment of the Canadian International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty (ICISS) in 2000, with the mandate to find a balance between respect for sovereignty and intervention, for purposes of protecting human rights. Much of the scholarly literature on military intervention for human protection purposes deals with the legality and legitimacy of the military dimension of the concepts. The significance of the thesis is that: it focusesthe investigation on the potential abuse of the use of force for human protection purposes, when moral arguments are used to justify an intervention that is primarily motivated by the interests of the intervener, and; the propensity to use disproportionate force in the attainment of the stated objective of human protection, by powerful intervening states. The central argument of the thesis is that there are double standards, selectivity, abuses, andindiscriminate and disproportionate use of force in the implementation of R2P by powerful countries, and; that, whether a military intervention is unilateral, or sanctioned by the UN Security Council, there is the potential for abuse, and in addition, disproportionate force may be used.The thesis makes recommendations to address these concerns, in order to ensure the survival of the concept. / Public, Constitutional and International Law / LL.D.

Today, an estimated 65,3 million people are reported as forcibly displaced globally. This figure includes 40,8 million people who are considered to be internally displaced within their own country and therefore rely upon the protection of their state. State sovereignty implies that the main responsibility for the protection of its people lies with the state. In situations where the state fails or is unwilling to fulfill its duty to protect the population, the principle of Responsibility to Protect (R2P) can be applied to prevent genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity. The purpose of this study is to review to what extent R2P provides protection for the rights of internally displaced persons and how R2P relates to the notion of human security. The theoretical framework is based on the concepts of human dignity, sovereignty, human security and R2P. Argumentation analysis was used in order to be able to compare the different arguments within the R2P discourse to determine whether the principle provides legitimate means for protection or not. The study shows that R2P provides several legitimate means for the protection of internally displaced people. Especially when it comes to measures preventing people from becoming displaced. However, the protection measures towards people already internally displaced can in several instances be regerded as insufficent and illegitimate. This is mainly due to the fact that the UN can undermine the legitimacy of the principle e.g. by obstructing aid support with veto decisions or lack strategies for reconstruction. The cooperation with other actors (AU, ICC) also shows that the protection of internally displaced persons may vary between states.

Sous l’angle du droit international, la responsabilité de protéger est traditionnellement analysée dans le but de déterminer sa portée normative. L’attrait de la doctrine internationaliste pour la question de la normativité du principe et l’indifférence habituelle du droit international vis-à-vis du système politique des États ont fini par confiner les développements sous les prismes parfois trop réducteurs du droit international et des relations internationales. Cette recherche entend proposer une perspective différente en prenant le contre-pied de cette approche classique. Elle aborde la problématique de la responsabilité de protéger non plus seulement sous l’angle des intervenants tiers à l’État défaillant, mais également, et surtout sous celui de cet État lui-même et de sa population. Il s’agit donc de revisiter la façon d’appréhender la responsabilité de protéger afin de montrer que le droit international n’est plus indifférent face aux systèmes politiques des États — a fortiori en crise. En interrogeant le lien entre la responsabilité de protéger et le système politique de l’État, l’analyse aboutit irrémédiablement à la conclusion selon laquelle la responsabilité de protéger est « enchassée » dans de normes qui ne sont pas exclusivement juridiques et qu’il convient dorénavant d’analyser en réseau. L’étude propose donc désormais de la qualifier de norme de congruence dès lors qu’elle conduit à apprécier la valeur juridique d’une règle de droit en tenant compte des différentes influences contenues dans celle-ci / From the perspective of international law, the responsibility to protect is traditionally analyzed in order to determine its normative scope. The attractiveness of the internationalist doctrine for the question of the normativity of the principle and the habitual indifference of international law to the political system of States ended up confining developments to the sometimes overly simplistic prisms of international law and international relations.This research intends to propose a different perspective by taking a contrary view of this classic approach. It addresses the issue of the responsibility to protect not only the point of view of third parties to the failed state, but also, and above all, the State itself and its population. It is therefore a question of revisiting the approach of apprehending the responsibility to protect in order to show that international law is no longer indifferent to the political systems of the States - let alone in crisis.In questioning the link between the responsibility to protect and the state's political system, the analysis leads irreparably to the conclusion that the responsibility to protect is “enshrined” in norms that are not exclusively legal and that currently analyze in the network. The study therefore proposes to define it as an norme de congruence since it leads to the assessment of the legal value of a rule of law taking into account the different influences contained in it

This dissertation scrutinises two related claims that were particularly heightened in 2009 as the European Union (EU) was celebrating the first tenth anniversary of its European Security and Defence Policy (ESDP), the implementing arm of its Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP). First, the two policy frameworks allegedly embodied sufficient added value for bettering EU intervention for human protection purposes in third places. Second, the ESDP supposedly enabled the EU to make a difference in its response to two bloody wars that broke out in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DR Congo) successively in 1996 and 1998. This thesis argues that the alleged added value and difference have been overstated at best. While various studies have taken a similar position, they have important shortcomings for at least four reasons: lack of a comprehensive account of the CFSP motives, capacities, and response; exclusive focus on civil and military operations; focus on the post-Second Congo War period; and a lack of conceptual clarity regarding two key terms – ‘conflict resolution’ and ‘peacebuilding’. This thesis goes beyond generalisation and undertakes a forensic examination of the CFSP statements, decisions, and actions precisely through the lens of Conflict Resolution (CR): a specific subject area of study with its own normative, theoretical, and practical advantages and shortcomings; and with a more comprehensive and indeed seminal conceptualisation of peacebuilding. The outcome is a far more nuanced assessment of failure and success of the EU’s peace endeavours in this context than can be obtained through a broad-brush approach to analysis.

La question principale de la présente thèse est celle de l’existence de « concepts moraux » – concepts poursuivant des fins altruistes plutôt qu’intéressées – en tant que droit non conventionnel, c’est à dire en tant que droit international coutumier ou principes généraux du droit. La question sera examinée en particulier dans le contexte du discours doctrinal afin de questionner le phénomène du constat trop rapide de leur existence.Le raisonnement se décline en trois étapes. Une série de questions préliminaires relatives à la Charte de l’ONU seront tout d’abord énoncées, elles serviront de cadre à la discussion. Ensuite suivront les sources du droit international non conventionnelles. Et enfin sera discuté l’élément essentiel des relations internationales qui sous-tend la question principale de cette thèse : l’intérêt de l’État. Cette dernière discussion sera illustrée par les exemples des droits de l’homme et de l’usage de la force pour raisons humanitaires. / The main question of the thesis is whether ‘non-treaty’ law – that is customary international law and general principles of law – may exist for ‘moral concepts’ – ideas that follow an altruistic as opposed to a self-interested motivation. In particular, this possibility is discussed against the background of doctrinal discourse on the issue, in order to confront the casual assessment that this is the case. The argument is advanced in three steps. First, a row of preliminary questions under the UN-CHARTER is set out for further discussion. Second follow the ‘non-treaty’ sources of international law. Third stands the essential element of international relations underlying the main question of this thesis: state interest. The latter discussion is complemented by two case studies, one on human rights and one on humanitarian use of force. / Die Forschungsfrage bezieht sich auf die Existenz von „moralischen Konzepten“ – also solchen, die einer altruistischen anstelle einer eigennützigen Motivation folgen – als Völkergewohnheitsrecht oder allgemeine Rechtsgrundsätze. Dabei wird die Frage insbesondere vor dem Hintergrund des Diskurses betrachtet, um der beiläufigen Feststellung deren Existenz entgegenzutreten.Die Argumentation folgt drei Schritten. Zu Beginn steht eine Reihe von Vorfragen in Bezug auf die Satzung der Vereinten Nationen als Rahmen für die weitere Diskussion. Zweitens werden das Völkergewohnheitsrecht und die allgemeinen Rechtsgrundsätze erläutert. Drittens wird das Staatsinteresse als essentielles Element der internationalen Beziehungen, das der Forschungsfrage zugrunde liegt, diskutiert. Abgerundet wird die Analyse durch zwei Fallstudien, eine zu Menschenrechten und eine zu humanitären Ausnahmen zum Gewaltverbot.

Lorsque des allégations de violations du droit international des droits de l’homme (DIDH) ou du droit international humanitaire (DIH) sont rapportées dans un pays, une meilleure compréhension des faits et de la situation est souvent nécessaire afin que l’Organisation des Nations Unies (ONU) puisse répondre de manière appropriée. A cette fin, les organes de l’ONU y compris l’Assemblée générale, le Conseil de sécurité, le Secrétaire général, le Conseil des droits de l’homme et même le Haut-Commissariat aux droits de l’homme peuvent créer des missions d’établissement des faits. Ces missions sont des organes interétatiques ad hoc créés en réponse à des violations graves et massives DIDH et du DIH. Leurs fonctions principales sont le plus souvent d’établir les faits, de les qualifier en droit et de faire des recommandations pour mettre fin à ces violations et y remédier. Le recours à ces missions, parfois appelées commissions d’enquête, n’a cessé de croître ces vingt dernières années, en particulier lorsque des violations du DIDH et du DIH, pouvant constituer des crimes internationaux, sont alléguées. A cet égard, la théorie de la justice transitionnelle et la doctrine de la responsabilité de protéger ont ouvert de nouvelles perspectives pour l’établissement des faits. Ceci explique que les objectifs et les fonctions des missions d’établissement des faits se sont diversifiés. Cependant, les Etats et une partie de la doctrine remettent en cause le caractère ad hoc du mode de création de ces missions, de leur mandat, et de leurs méthodes de travail. Nous étudierons cette tension entre uniformité et diversité afin de proposer des solutions adaptées permettant de remédier aux problèmes dénoncés par la doctrine et de maximiser l’impact de ces missions sur de la réponse des parties prenantes notamment l’État concerné et l’ONU. / To respond appropriately to violations of human rights and humanitarian law, the United Nations requires an in-depth knowledge of the facts alleged and a better understanding of the relevant situation on the ground. To this end, United Nations organs including the General Assembly, the Security Council, the Secretary General, the Human Rights Council and even the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights may create fact-finding missions. These missions are collegial ad hoc bodies created in response to human rights and humanitarian law violations that are particularly grave. Their functions generally include establishing the facts, conducting a legal appraisal of facts, and making recommendations for the cessation of violations and for their remedy. In the past twenty years, United Nations organs have increasingly resorted to these missions – often referred to as commissions of inquiry – in particular when violations of international human rights and international humanitarian law may amount to international crimes. In this respect, transitional justice theory and the doctrine of the responsibility to protect provide new perspectives for fact-finding. The objectives and functions of these missions have therefore diversified. However, some states and scholars criticize the ad hoc creation of the missions, their often politicized mandate, and their methods of work. We will elaborate on this tension between uniformity and diversity and propose some solutions. These proposals will aim at addressing the issues raised by scholars as well as maximizing the missions’ impact on stakeholders’ response to the situation.

Abstract: In 2011, the Libyan and Syrian crises caught the attention of the media and international society. Whereas the former reached a positive outcome in compliance with the application of the Responsibility to Protect norm, the latter continues to claim the lives of thousands of people to this day. Despite calls by the international community, China and Russia continue being an impediment for the adoption of measures in Syria in the name of the Responsibility to Protect. Their arguments are in line with the criticized Libyan intervention. Nevertheless, it is possible that the real reasons behind this shift of attitude from one crisis to another, are nothing more than a neo-realistic response to regional politics. Keywords: Libya, Syria, Responsibility to Protect (RtoP), Neo-realism, Social constructivism, China, Russia.

La responsabilité de protéger est un concept issu des travaux de la Commission internationale de l’intervention et de la souveraineté des États (CIISE). Établie en 2000 à l’initiative du CANADA, elle a recherché à dépasser les controverses inhérentes aux débats relatifs au « droit d’intervention humanitaire ». Aux fins d’atteindre cet objectif, la Commission a forgé un nouveau concept, la « responsabilité de protéger », qui permît de concilier, plutôt qu’opposer, les notions de souveraineté et d’intervention.<p>Depuis lors, la responsabilité de protéger a fait l’objet de vives controverses en droit international. Intégrée dans une résolution de l’Assemblée générale de l’ONU en septembre 2005, appliquée par le Conseil de sécurité lors de la crise en LIBYE de mars 2011, le concept se trouve, aujourd’hui, au centre des débats se rapportant au cadre juridique de la protection des populations civiles.<p>La présente thèse entend examiner les différentes implications juridiques de la responsabilité de protéger, en optant pour une démarche résolument positiviste. La réflexion proposée tente d’en embrasser les différents aspects, tant conceptuels qu’opérationnels, aux fins d’aboutir à une étude globale, synthétique et actualisée du concept. Partant, une interrogation commandera l’ensemble de notre réflexion: l’émergence de la responsabilité de protéger a-t-elle, en droit international, permis une amélioration de la protection des populations civiles ? / Doctorat en Sciences juridiques / info:eu-repo/semantics/nonPublished

This thesis Collective Actions of the UN Security Council for the Protection of Human Rights deals with, as the title suggests, collective actions for the protection of human rights with the mandate of the UN Security Council. The thesis is divided into an introduction, conclusion, and four chapters. In the first chapter, the system of human rights protection is described, as it was set up within the newly-formed United Nations after World War II. This chapter also deals with collective actions of the UN Security Council, with or without the use of force, on a theoretical level, e.g. their authorization and possibility of measures that can be taken within the UN system against the perpetrator. Second chapter deals with examples of collective actions of the UN Security Council during the Cold War period. In this era, collective actions of the UN Security Council were authorized only twice, in case of South Africa as a reaction to their policy of apartheid, and in case of South Rhodesia as a reaction to the unilateral declaration of independence by the white minority government. Both cases are described in the chapter. The following chapter describes the development of human rights theories after the end of Cold War. With the end of the bipolar system, there is a shift in the perception of human...