The UN Security Council is the preeminent multilateral decision-making body and has the legal authority to initiate military interventions if it first determines a threat to international peace and security, including from civil wars or widespread state repression. While traditional norms of non-intervention and the politics of the Cold War curtailed the body’s ability to fulfil this role, evolving understandings and practices of sovereignty and security in the post-Cold War era have led to the apparent emergence of a new norm permitting ‘humanitarian intervention’ and an in principle acceptance that the body has a ‘responsibility to protect’ vulnerable civilians residing inside the borders of their own state, including through military means. In this context, the thesis argues that the situation in Darfur, western Sudan, has represented a quintessential case for the Council to fulfil its ‘responsibility to protect’. According to a number of authoritative investigations, since 2003 the Sudanese government and government-allied Arab militias have committed war crimes and crimes against humanity on a widespread and systematic basis against Darfur’s non-Arab population. As a result, over 200,000 people died either directly from violence or indirectly from conflict-induced disease and malnutrition, while a further two million fled from their homes and villages in fear. A number of nonmilitary measures were attempted by the Council but failed to create adequate security on the ground. As such, there was a compelling legal-institutional, normative and moral case for the Council to coercively deploy a military intervention in Sudan to protect vulnerable civilians in Darfur. However, during the 2003-06 period of study, no such intervention was deployed. The thesis argues that intervention by the Council was precluded by the national interests of its permanent members, including a lucrative economic relationship between China and Sudan, and because of valuable Sudanese intelligence cooperation in Western counter-terrorism operations in the region. The thesis concludes that the Council’s members chose to preserve these national interests at the expense of protecting civilians in Darfur.

This thesis examines the discourse on human security, in particular the 2001 report by the International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty, The Responsibility to Protect. I contend that the human of human security is deeply indebted to an account of the modern subject that is also responsible for producing the model of the citizen/state relationship to which human security is conceived of as a response. Human security reaffirms the appropriateness of the sovereign state while at the same time re-conceiving sovereignty as responsibility and empowering certain international actors to intervene in sovereign states should they fail to act responsibly. Like the citizen, the ostensibly universal category of the human is produced through the exclusion or dehumanization of some ways of being human and some human beings. However, I also consider the ways in which human security works to humanize its subjects, producing the kinds of humans that can be secured.

With lessons learned from the 1999 Kosovo intervention as a point of departure, this thesis addresses the question of whether the development of the Responsibility to Protect (RtoP) doctrine and the Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP) actually made a difference in determining whether and how Europe responded to subsequent mass atrocities in its neighbourhood. Viewing the RtoP as an emerging international norm, a social constructivist framework is applied to explore the influence of norms on European foreign policy-making. It is argued that even an emerging international norm can be influential if it is considered a legitimate behavioural claim. The influence of the RtoP will be assessed by gauging the extent to which it is distinctively used to justify foreign policy decisions and to communicate the basis for those choices to a wider audience. The development of the RtoP and the CSDP from 1999-2011 in theory and practice paves the way for an in-depth case study analysis. Focusing on the UN, the EU as well as French, German and British discourses, the question of whether the RtoP has actually made a difference will be answered by scrutinizing European responses to the Libyan crisis (March – October 2011) and the Syrian crisis (March 2011 – September 2013). Ultimately, light is shed not only on the relevance of the RtoP for Europe but also on the role of the EU as a security actor in its neighbourhood.

By 2018 the war in Syria has been going on for seven years. The conflict has caused the death of hundreds of thousands and has forced more than 11 million Syrians to flee their homes. The responsibility for the huge humanitarian disaster rests on the perpetrators but who has the responsibility to protect? The resolution ’Responsibility to Protect’ [R2P] determines the responsibility to protect on to the international community and the United Nations [UN]. When looking at the large numbers of refugees, wounded and dead the question arises, why hasn't the UN succeed in its responsibility to protect the Syrian people? This case study of the UN:s diplomatic mission and why it has failed to protect the Syrian people rests on the theoretical foundations of resolution R2P, two branches of diplomacy and further the inclusion of women in peacemaking processes. The inclusion of women in the decision-making peace processes are highly important to gain a holistic perspective and an enduring peace according to several available sources. Available data reveals, however, that the numbers of women included in the peace process in Syria are rather low and when women are included they are in a position of advocacy, not decision-making. The essay’s conclusion establishes the prospects for peace in Syria as quite low due to the poor preconditions. Further, the essay finds that the international community through the UN possesses the necessary framework, and bears the responsibility for the Syrian people due to the Syrian government's atrocities committed against its people. The UN:s diplomatic strategy are by the Secretary-General Special Envoys characterized by humanitarian diplomacy, but unfortunately, all attempts by the UN or any other actor to the time of writing have been without success.

“For too long the world has stood by in the face of atrocities. The Responsibility to Protect is a commitment to act.” After the 2005 World Summit, the international community endorsed a new international norm, the Responsibility to Protect. This new international norm stipulates that the primary responsibility to protect the population of a country lies with the state itself. When a state is either unable or unwilling to protect peoples, the responsibility shifts to the international community. The obligation must be exercised preventively and the tools of action include diplomatic, legal and other peaceful measures; coercive measures such as sanctions; and, as a last resort, military force. / Thesis (LLM (Human Rights and Democratisation in Africa)) -- University of Pretoria, 2011. / http://www.chr.up.ac.za/ / nf2012 / Centre for Human Rights / LLM

The master thesis on the topic Why do states decide for or against the intervention in other states? Case Study: Libya and Syria is focused on analysing the motives of states, which are crucial for deciding to intervene or not to intervene in the territory of a foreign state. The whole issue is assessed from the perspective of two major theories of international relations - liberalism and realism. As the first research case was chosen the international community's intervention in Libya in 2011. The case was analysed from the perspective of Sweden, which took part in the operation by the deployment of eight fighters Jas 39 Gripen. As the second case was chosen the civil war in Syria, which has been underway since 2011 and whose situation would have required similar interference by the international community. However, this has not happen until that time, although the states are militarily involved in Syria. This case was analysed from the view of Russia, which did not take part in operation in Libya, but since September 2015 has been involved in fighting on the ground in Syria. As a last case was chosen Great Britain, which has militarily participated in both conflicts. For the analysis itself was used Ortega's typology of interventions, which was adapted for the purpose of this work. The different...

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 thesis examined the connection between Responsibility to Protect (R2P) as an international norm and the education of soldiers in Sweden and America. In a number of military handbooks and guides, the United States has emphasized the importance of R2P training as fundamental to the conduct of peace operations. One of the Swedish Armed Forces' four pillars (crimes against humanity, genocide, war crimes and ethnic cleansing) is international peace operations, which indicates that training in such operations is of great importance. Sweden and the United States have a positive stance on the UN principle R2P and have expressed themselves in that it is an important tool in the work towards peace. The education within the four crimes that are included in R2P is thus of great importance for both Sweden and the United States in peace work. Thus, the purpose of this thesis is to describe and compare the connection between R2P as an international norm and the training of soldiers in the four crimes that are included in the R2P principle. The results showed that R2P contains parts that are more or less prioritized by the Swedish and American military in terms of training of soldiers. It is clear that the principle R2P is not prioritized per se, but the education is instead given in subjects that the principle concerns, and therefore the education can be counted as being given, to a certain extent, in R2P.

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.