Este trabalho tem dois grandes objetivos: analisar a intervenção internacional ocorrida na Líbia em 2011 pelas perspectivas do direito internacional e das relações internacionais, e tratar da atual conjuntura do país no pós-intervenção. Quanto ao primeiro objetivo, aborda-se toda a evolução do uso da força no sistema internacional até o desenvolvimento do conceito de Responsabilidade de Proteger, que constitui o ponto de confluência da longa tradição de guerra justa, do adensamento normativo do direito internacional (sobretudo do jus ad bellum e do jus in bello), da ampliação das atribuições do Conselho de Segurança da ONU e das transformações dos conflitos armados. Após, verificam-se as resoluções aprovadas entre fevereiro e outubro de 2011, sobretudo a Resolução 1973, que autorizou o uso da força para a proteção de civis. Passa-se a estabelecer os limites jurídicos do mandato interventor, visando a determinar se as ações dos Estados mandatados se coadunaram com os parâmetros jurídicos existentes. Nesse sentido, recorre-se ao contexto político no Conselho de Segurança da ONU existente na aprovação da Resolução 1973 e no decorrer da intervenção. Conclui-se que a coalition of the willing violou a Resolução 1973 e o direito internacional ao promover mudança de regime, ao fornecer aos rebeldes armamentos ofensivos e treinamento militar, bem como ao coordenar-se com eles, ao bombardear civis, ao rejeitar propostas de paz da União Africana após a proteção a Benghazi e ao procurar derrotar militarmente o regime de Kadafi. Em seguida, estudam-se as políticas externas dos Estados-membros permanentes do Conselho de Segurança da ONU em 2011, tanto suas diretrizes gerais quanto os objetivos específicos para o Oriente Médio e a Líbia. São analisadas as razões por que Estados Unidos, França e Reino Unido decidiram intervir e por que não houve vetos de Rússia e China. Quanto ao segundo objetivo, estuda-se a atual situação da Líbia, a fim de verificar as principais causas de sua presente instabilidade, bem como os fatores por que Estados mandatados pouco se comprometeram com a reconstrução do país após a intervenção. Apontam-se como fatores de instabilidade a proliferação de grupos armados fora de efetivo controle estatal, fronteiras porosas aliadas a crescimento de tráficos e contrabando, vazio institucional desde a independência, hesitante identidade nacional e constante dicotomia centro-periferia. Iniciativas de reconstrução pós-conflito tampouco constituíram norma jurídica a obrigar os Estados. Alto custo financeiro e político de missões de paz/estabilização (capacetes azuis), a exemplo daquelas no Afeganistão e Iraque, em contexto de crise econômica, falta de apoio popular nos principais Estados mandatados e entre as novas lideranças líbias contribuíram para missão da ONU de baixo perfil. Eventos na Líbia de 2011 indicam que intervenções para proteção de civis seguem lógica de maximizar benefícios pretendidos e minimizar custos (Rationality to Protect). Spillover regional da instabilidade e novas intervenções internacionais na Líbia pós-2011 seguido de Mea culpa das principais lideranças dos Estados mandatados. / This research has two objectives: to analyse the 2011 international intervention in Libya through the lenses of both international law and international relations, and to discuss Libya\'s post-intervention political process. Regarding the first objective, the historic evolution of the use of force in international law until the development of the concept of Responsibility to Protect is discussed. Responsibility to Protect is the point into which the long tradition of just war, the development of international law (especially the rules of jus ad bellum and jus in bello), the growing responsibilities of the UN Security Council in the maintenance of world peace and security, and the changing nature of armed conflicts converge. Also, all the resolutions passed by the UN Security Council between February and October 2011 are examined in detail, especially Resolution 1973, which authorised the use of force to protect civilians in Libya, in order to verify if the actions of the states that took part in the intervention were consistent with the existing legal parameters. In this regard, the political context of the UN Security Council when Resolution 1973 was passed and during the intervention is taken into consideration. It is therefore concluded that the coalition of the willing violated Resolution 1973 and international law by promoting regime change, by sending weapons to the rebels, by training and coordinating with them, by bombing civilians, by rejecting the African Union peace overtures after Benghazi was secured, and by pursuing the military defeat of Gaddafi\'s forces. Moreover, the foreign policies of the five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council are analysed, including the strategies concerning the Middle East and North Africa, as well as those concerning Libya in 2011. Thus, the motives that led the United States, France, and Great Britain to push for intervention, as well as those that drove Russia and China to abstain, are explained. As for the second objective, the current political situation of Libya is analysed, especially the reasons for its post-intervention instability, as well as the causes of the intervening states\' lack of commitment to post-conflict reconstruction. Libya\'s political instability derives mostly from the proliferation of armed groups that are not placed under effective government control, from porous borders, from the growth of human and drug trafficking as well as smuggling routes, from the inexistence of strong state institutions since independence, from a hesitant national identity, and from a constant dichotomy between centre and periphery. Post-conflict reconstruction does not constitute a binding legal obligation. High financial and political costs of peace/stabilisation operations, like those in Afghanistan and Iraq, economic crisis, lack of popular support in the leading members of the coalition of the willing and among new Libyan leaders contributed to a low-key UN mission. Interventions to protect civilians are influenced by political calculations of minimising risks and maximising benefits (Rationality to Protect). Libya\'s instability has spread to its neighbours and new international interventions have taken place in the country, as the leaders of the 2011 intervening states have recognised their mistakes.

Este trabalho tem dois grandes objetivos: analisar a intervenção internacional ocorrida na Líbia em 2011 pelas perspectivas do direito internacional e das relações internacionais, e tratar da atual conjuntura do país no pós-intervenção. Quanto ao primeiro objetivo, aborda-se toda a evolução do uso da força no sistema internacional até o desenvolvimento do conceito de Responsabilidade de Proteger, que constitui o ponto de confluência da longa tradição de guerra justa, do adensamento normativo do direito internacional (sobretudo do jus ad bellum e do jus in bello), da ampliação das atribuições do Conselho de Segurança da ONU e das transformações dos conflitos armados. Após, verificam-se as resoluções aprovadas entre fevereiro e outubro de 2011, sobretudo a Resolução 1973, que autorizou o uso da força para a proteção de civis. Passa-se a estabelecer os limites jurídicos do mandato interventor, visando a determinar se as ações dos Estados mandatados se coadunaram com os parâmetros jurídicos existentes. Nesse sentido, recorre-se ao contexto político no Conselho de Segurança da ONU existente na aprovação da Resolução 1973 e no decorrer da intervenção. Conclui-se que a coalition of the willing violou a Resolução 1973 e o direito internacional ao promover mudança de regime, ao fornecer aos rebeldes armamentos ofensivos e treinamento militar, bem como ao coordenar-se com eles, ao bombardear civis, ao rejeitar propostas de paz da União Africana após a proteção a Benghazi e ao procurar derrotar militarmente o regime de Kadafi. Em seguida, estudam-se as políticas externas dos Estados-membros permanentes do Conselho de Segurança da ONU em 2011, tanto suas diretrizes gerais quanto os objetivos específicos para o Oriente Médio e a Líbia. São analisadas as razões por que Estados Unidos, França e Reino Unido decidiram intervir e por que não houve vetos de Rússia e China. Quanto ao segundo objetivo, estuda-se a atual situação da Líbia, a fim de verificar as principais causas de sua presente instabilidade, bem como os fatores por que Estados mandatados pouco se comprometeram com a reconstrução do país após a intervenção. Apontam-se como fatores de instabilidade a proliferação de grupos armados fora de efetivo controle estatal, fronteiras porosas aliadas a crescimento de tráficos e contrabando, vazio institucional desde a independência, hesitante identidade nacional e constante dicotomia centro-periferia. Iniciativas de reconstrução pós-conflito tampouco constituíram norma jurídica a obrigar os Estados. Alto custo financeiro e político de missões de paz/estabilização (capacetes azuis), a exemplo daquelas no Afeganistão e Iraque, em contexto de crise econômica, falta de apoio popular nos principais Estados mandatados e entre as novas lideranças líbias contribuíram para missão da ONU de baixo perfil. Eventos na Líbia de 2011 indicam que intervenções para proteção de civis seguem lógica de maximizar benefícios pretendidos e minimizar custos (Rationality to Protect). Spillover regional da instabilidade e novas intervenções internacionais na Líbia pós-2011 seguido de Mea culpa das principais lideranças dos Estados mandatados. / This research has two objectives: to analyse the 2011 international intervention in Libya through the lenses of both international law and international relations, and to discuss Libya\'s post-intervention political process. Regarding the first objective, the historic evolution of the use of force in international law until the development of the concept of Responsibility to Protect is discussed. Responsibility to Protect is the point into which the long tradition of just war, the development of international law (especially the rules of jus ad bellum and jus in bello), the growing responsibilities of the UN Security Council in the maintenance of world peace and security, and the changing nature of armed conflicts converge. Also, all the resolutions passed by the UN Security Council between February and October 2011 are examined in detail, especially Resolution 1973, which authorised the use of force to protect civilians in Libya, in order to verify if the actions of the states that took part in the intervention were consistent with the existing legal parameters. In this regard, the political context of the UN Security Council when Resolution 1973 was passed and during the intervention is taken into consideration. It is therefore concluded that the coalition of the willing violated Resolution 1973 and international law by promoting regime change, by sending weapons to the rebels, by training and coordinating with them, by bombing civilians, by rejecting the African Union peace overtures after Benghazi was secured, and by pursuing the military defeat of Gaddafi\'s forces. Moreover, the foreign policies of the five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council are analysed, including the strategies concerning the Middle East and North Africa, as well as those concerning Libya in 2011. Thus, the motives that led the United States, France, and Great Britain to push for intervention, as well as those that drove Russia and China to abstain, are explained. As for the second objective, the current political situation of Libya is analysed, especially the reasons for its post-intervention instability, as well as the causes of the intervening states\' lack of commitment to post-conflict reconstruction. Libya\'s political instability derives mostly from the proliferation of armed groups that are not placed under effective government control, from porous borders, from the growth of human and drug trafficking as well as smuggling routes, from the inexistence of strong state institutions since independence, from a hesitant national identity, and from a constant dichotomy between centre and periphery. Post-conflict reconstruction does not constitute a binding legal obligation. High financial and political costs of peace/stabilisation operations, like those in Afghanistan and Iraq, economic crisis, lack of popular support in the leading members of the coalition of the willing and among new Libyan leaders contributed to a low-key UN mission. Interventions to protect civilians are influenced by political calculations of minimising risks and maximising benefits (Rationality to Protect). Libya\'s instability has spread to its neighbours and new international interventions have taken place in the country, as the leaders of the 2011 intervening states have recognised their mistakes.

保護責任（R2P）是當前國際社會最受矚目，但同時也最受爭議的概念之一，有人認為這個概念有助於實踐國際人權，幫助國際社會向需要幫助的人民伸出援手；有學者認為這是為了解決主權與人權之間的爭端；更有人認為這只是「人道干涉」的借屍還魂，不過是西方強權為了干涉他國的手段而已。 隨著時間進展，當2005年保護責任在世界高峰會（World Summit）中得到聯合國會員國一致共識同時，有人認為R2P原本試圖修正「人道干涉困境」與國際法架構的雄心壯志，淪落對現有國際法架構的確認，無疑地呈現顯著的概念質變（conceptual change）。然而當民主春風吹過中東與北非地區，阿拉伯之春導致許多政府爆發侵犯人權情事，R2P再度受到矚目，甚至在2011年被聯合國安理會引用，作為干涉利比亞局勢的重要說辭，產生與2005年世界高峰會截然不同的內容。儘管被視為R2P概念成形以來的一大勝利，但也掀起新一波對R2P概念的爭辯。 本文主張，R2P面臨如此爭議，「定義」以及「與主權關係」不明是最主要的原因之一。對於支持者而言，這是有別於人道干涉，且根據現行「負責任主權」的全新人權執行機制，符合「即時性」、「有效性」的大原則。但對於反對者而言，這是人道干涉藉由「責任」一詞改頭換面，「換湯不換藥」，表面說詞再動人，都無法掩蓋他基於國家私利，干涉他國完整，破壞國家主權體系的意圖。 為了解決這項爭議，本研究試圖透過「語料庫語言學」的方法回答以下研究問題：第一，對於實際參與聯合國決策的各國代表而言，到底何謂「R2P」？在聯合國的場域中，「R2P」的出現是否真如部分學者所主張，漸漸改變「主權」的內涵？第二，如果主權概念與「R2P」的概念確實存在連動關係，那關係為何？ 根據本研究的研究成果可以發現，第一，在聯合國安理會的場域中，2005年世界高峰會的共識確實取代既有概念，讓「R2P」內容產生質變。但過去的「預防」概念依舊得到存續。第二，「R2P」概念的出現確實為「主權」增加更多的「責任」，儘管在安理會的場域中幅度並不大，但當有意識地使用「R2P」時，會特別強調「責任」的重要性。第三，儘管許多學者主張「R2P」的概念已經形成共識，重點在於「實踐」而非「爭辯」，但實際上真正重視「實踐」者，恐怕只有聯合國秘書長本人。 / Although generally recognized in World Summit Outcome Document, Responsibility to Protect (R2P) is one of the most controversial concepts of International Relations (IR). Especially, its relationship with sovereignty is one of the most debatable ones. For answering the questions, it is purposed to inquiry texts of meeting verbatim record of United Nations (UN), with the assistance of discourse analysis and digital toolkits. While scholars of IR and Political Thoughts have analyzed its theoretical, definition, legal and implementation dimensions, little attention is paid to its discursive change to examine their mutual influence. For proceeding full and large-scale research, present techniques of text mining enable researchers to work on “big texts”, and to extract the linguistic context beyond them. In general, this thesis is intended to complete the following advancements of IR studies: firstly, establish the contextual understanding of conceptual change of R2P and sovereignty, and find if hidden information exists behind those texts; secondly, if text mining and related toolkits does assist fulfillment of this proposal, it might be possibly new research skill to be applied in IR. This thesis investigates the present understandings of Sovereignty and R2P in IR. It hypothesizes that, firstly, most of present researches on R2P neglected the role of language; secondly, the generation of R2P might be related to the conceptual change of sovereignty in twenty-first century.

A travers de la cristallisation du droit d’ingérence et la responsabilité de protéger la Communauté internationale tente de combler l'écart entre la moralité et la légalité de l’ingérence à des fins de protection de droits humains. Car l’ingérence à des fins de protection humaine, depuis de la fin de la guerre froide, a trouvé une base juridique coutumière et ne correspond plus à un acte exceptionnel susceptible de se justifier dans certaines hypothèses. Dans cette démarche, en cas d’échec du Conseil de sécurité à la mise en œuvre d’une ingérence militaire, les organisations régionales pourraient sans autorisation « préalable » et « précise » du Conseil de sécurité, engager une ingérence armée. L’étude de la valeur juridique de l’ONU et les pratiques depuis de la fin de la guerre froide, permet de constater que si le droit d’ingérence et la responsabilité de protéger n’ont pas encore trouvé un fondement « direct » dans les conventions internationales, ils peuvent cependant trouver un socle juridique dans la coutume internationale. En effet, l’analyse de la valeur des résolutions de l’ONU et des éléments coutumiers du droit d’ingérence et de la responsabilité de protéger montrent comment les résolutions 43/131 et 45/100 de l’Assemblée générale ont inauguré le processus du droit d’ingérence et la responsabilité de protéger. Et depuis les années 1990, la pratique du Conseil de sécurité, illustrée par un nombre important de résolutions ayant donné lieu à la mise en œuvre d’opérations tout aussi nombreuses, ainsi que la pratique des Etats et les organisations régionales donnent un corps juridique à l’ingérence à des fins de protection humaine et ne laissent aucun doute sur la nature juridique de celle-ci. / Through crystallization of the right and responsibility to intervene to protect the international community tries to bridge the gap between morality and legality of the interference for the protection of human rights. As interference in human protection purposes, since the end of the Cold War, found a legal basis for customary and does not correspond to an exceptional act may be justified in certain circumstances. With this approach, in case of failure of the Security Council in the implementation of military interference, regional organizations could without authorization "prior" and "precise" Security Council, commit armed interference. The study of the legal status of the UN and practices since the end of the Cold War, shows that if the right of intervention and the responsibility to protect has not yet found a foundation "live" in international conventions, however, they can find a legal basis in customary international law. Indeed, analysis of the value of UN resolutions and customary law elements of interference and the responsibility to protect demonstrate how resolutions 43/131 and 45/100 of the General Assembly inaugurated the process the right of intervention and the responsibility to protect. And since the 1990s, the practice of the Security Council, illustrated by a large number of resolutions that led to the implementation of operations just as many, and the practice of States and regional organizations to provide a legal body interference for human protection and leave no doubt about the legal nature of the latter.

Le siècle actuel est un siècle axé sur la protection des êtres humains contre les périls imminents qui menacent leur existence et que sont, pour n’en citer que quelques uns, la pauvreté, la maladie et la faim. Aussi, face à l’explosion des conflits internes, les débats sur la sécurité ont beaucoup évolué ces dernières années et ont conduit à la reconnaissance et à l’affirmation de la sécurité humaine en droit international. Cette situation aura une certaine incidence sur le système international et les débats sur la prévention des conflits du début du millénaire. Organisation politique et culturelle, la Francophonie intègre cette nouvelle conception de la sécurité dans ses actions de prévention structurelle des conflits dont le but est d’agir sur les causes profondes des conflits en travaillant principalement à l’édification d’un État de droit au service des populations civiles. L’espace francophone africain est particulièrement concerné par cette conflictualité politique extrêmement violente, ce qui justifie la légitimité de l’Organisation internationale de la Francophonie dans ce domaine. Pour autant, peut-elle être un acteur novateur de la prévention devant la multitude d’acteurs qui multiplient les interventions sur le continent et disposent de plus de moyens d’actions ? A-t-elle la capacité de rassembler l’ensemble de ses États membres sur des sujets d’intérêt commun et particulièrement, sur la prévention ? Ses programmes sont-ils un simple accompagnement des programmes internationaux, ou un complément utile et pertinent ? Autant de questions auxquelles nous tenterons d’apporter des réponses tout au long de cette recherche. / The current century is a century of protecting human beings against the imminent perils threatening their existence, and to mention but a few, proverty, disease and hunger. Also, faced with the explosion of internal conflicts, debates on security have evolved considerably these last years leading to the recognition and affirmation of human security in international law. This situation will have some impact on the international system and debates on conflict prevention at the turn of the millenium. As a political and cultural organization, La Francophonie integrates this new conception of security into its structural conflict prevention actions, the purpose of which is to act on the root causes of conflict by working primarily to build the rule of law in the service of civilian populations. The African Francophone area is particularly concerned by this extremely violent political conflict, which justifies the legitimacy of the International Organization of La Francophonie in this area. However, can it be an innovative actor of prevention in front of the multitude of actors who multiply the interventions on the continent and have more means of actions ? Does it have the capacity to bring together all of its Member States on topics of common interest and particularly on prevention? Are it's programs a simple accompaniment of international programs, or a useful and relevant complement? So many questions that we will try to provide answers throughout this research.

Maintaining the peace and security by regional arrangements in Africa (focusing on peace-keeping operations) Abstract The present thesis focuses on the issue of peace-keeping operations maintained by the regional and sub-regional organizations in Africa, namely African Union and ECOWAS. The main statement of the thesis is the following: The United Nations is unable to react effectively to threats to international peace and security, especially in cases of mass violations of human rights in intrastate conflicts, that have severe impact on particular region including refugee crisis or spreading the conflict to other states of the region. In the thesis, particular instruments of the above-mentioned international organizations, that create the framework for operations for maintaining peace and security in the region, are described. Attention is also paid to the relevant bodies of the African union and ECOWAS such as Peace and security council of the AU or African standby force. The thesis elaborates on problematic or controversial issues from international law perspective. In the first place, the concept of humanitarian intervention and related concept of responsibility to protect is underlined. It is demonstrated that African Union and ECOWAS have significant contribution to these concepts when implementing...

Inicialmente, esta dissertação apresenta o marco teórico conceitual em que se situa a sociedade internacional contemporânea, as fontes tradicionais do direito internacional expostas no art. 38 do Estatuto da Corte Internacional de Justiça, as possíveis novas fontes do direito internacional atos unilaterais de Estados, atos de organizações internacionais e Soft Law. É abordado em seguida o paradigma da soberania decorrente da modificação da sociedade internacional. Os fundamentos da Responsabilidade de Proteger (R2P) são levados a uma análise sob as diversas fontes do direito internacional. A R2P não se verifica como fonte autônoma do direito internacional nos princípios gerais de direitos, nas convenções internacionais e nos meios auxiliares da doutrina e da jurisprudência. Todavia, seu enquadramento é feito em duas teorias: branda e dinâmica. Em razão de seu caráter de formação de opinio juris e da prática reiterada, a teoria branda considera a R2P uma manifestação do costume internacional. Enquanto isso, a teoria dinâmica leva em consideração a evolução do direito internacional contemporâneo, que considera a Soft Law uma fonte autônoma, bem como as manifestações da R2P. Conclui-se, então, que a teoria da R2P está sedimentada nas fontes do direito internacional contemporâneo e clássico. / Firstly this thesis presents the conceptual framework in which lies the contemporary international society, the traditional sources of International Law - exposed in art. 38 of the Statute of the International Court of Justice, the possible new sources of International Law - unilateral acts of States, international organizations and acts of Soft Law. Then, it brings forward the paradigm of sovereignty resulting from the modification of the international society. The foundations of the Responsibility to Protect are subject to an analysis emphasizing the variety of International Law sources. The R2P is not embraced as an autonomous source of International Law in the general principles, international conventions, doctrine and jurisprudence. However, its framing is analyzed in this thesis with two theories: \"mild\" and \"dynamic\". Considering the formation of opinio juris and the repeated practice, the mild theory considers R2P as a manifestation of international custom. Meanwhile, the dynamic theory takes into account the evolution of contemporary International Law, which considers Soft Law as an autonomous source, as well as the manifestations of R2P. So the conclusion is that the theory of R2P is based in the sources of contemporary and classic International Law.

Topic of this thesis is the Responsibility to Protect (R2P) doctrine that has become very current at the present time because of its use in legitimising the operation of NATO and other countries during the uprising in Libya in 2011. Apart from a number of sympathetic opinions, it has caused a wave critique, which has been of two types. Some criticised even the fact itself that the UN Security Council had labelled the Libya situation as a case suited for the application of this doctrine. There were also those who had agreed wholeheartedly with this designation, but who were disappointed by how the operation that followed had proceeded. This section of critics claims that NATO and other states that took part in the operation overstepped the mandate granted to them by the Security Council and thereby caused at least a partial delegitimising of R2P.

By agreeing to The Responsibility to Protect doctrine (R2P) at the United Nations World Summit in 2005, and later adopting a resolution reaffirming the support, the Russian federation accepted a responsibility of the international community to protect populations of other states, if the state itself manifestly fails to protect its own populations. However, Russia has acted in an inconsistent way by exercising its commitment to the R2P principle occasionally. The purpose of this study is to give an answer to the question of why Russia has acted in an inconsistent way to The Responsibility to Protect doctrine. Analyzing the inconsistency puzzle through the realist, liberal and constructivist lens, questioning why Russia has accepted an R2P intervention regarding Libya to halt ongoing mass atrocities, but repeatedly has vetoed against R2P interventions regarding Syria and recently regarding Venezuela, the study concludes that a combination of the three approaches is needed to explain and understand Russia’s inconsistent reaction. Second, it concludes that Russia acted inconsistently because President Medvedev was affected by, and agreeing with, international norms, thereby accepting an R2P into Libya, while President Putin was affected by, and wanted to hold on to the Russian identity. By rejecting R2P interventions in the Syria and Venezuela cases, Putin thereby secured Russian national interests, using a liberal narrative as a pretext for the actions.

The main aim of the master thesis titled "Syria and the concept responsibility to assist: new approach towards conflict resolution?" is to find out whether the extension of the doctrine of responsibility to protect by the concept of responsibility to assist that is based on the support of nonviolent movements could work as a new approach towards conflict resolution and thanks to this it could constitute another way of international assistance and civilian protection in cases when it is the regime that perpetrates the violence against its own population. For this reason the thesis, via the Syrian civil war that offers wide range of internal responses to the violence perpetrated by the regime against civilians, focuses on three different forms of international involvement and assistance. These are the international military intervention under the third pillar of R2P, the backing of domestic violent groups and insurgents and last but not least the assistance to nonviolent movements and civil initiatives in the form of R2A as a potential expansion of the second pillar under the R2P doctrine. These approaches are analyzed with regard to the issues of state sovereignty and moral responsibility to protect civilians that arises from the inconsistency of these two aspects in relation to any kind of...