The aim of this study is to evaluate the United Nations (UN) role in the resolution, management and termination of the conflict in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) with specific reference to the UN Organisation Mission in the Democratic Republic of the Congo (MONUC). The aim emanates from the basic research question: To what extent did the deployment of MONUC contribute to the termination of internal conflict in the DRC and create conditions conducive for the holding of democratic elections? The research problem generated four subsidiary questions: Was the intention of the drafters of the Lusaka Agreement for the UN converted into a viable peacekeeping mission, especially in the early phases of the mission? Did MONUC receive adequate resources to fulfil its task, commensurate with the size and complexity of the operational theatre and its mandate? Why was a development such as the deployment of Interim Emergency Multi National Force (IEMF) in Ituri (2003) necessary, given the fact that MONUC was deployed? Were the expectations regarding MONUC involvement in the disarmament, demobilisation, reintegration, resettlement and repatriation (DDRRR) programme and the domestic disarmament, demobilisation, reintegration (DDR) programme realistic? Therefore four sub-problems were addressed, namely the issue of the mission mandate; the resourcing of the mission relative to the mandate and the operational theatre; the external augmentation of the mission; and the MONUC role in DDRRR and DDR. Following a definition of the concept internal conflict and a discussion of the factors contributing to internal conflict, the theory of peacekeeping was described to determine a framework for the evaluation of the UN peace mission in the DRC, based on the recommendations of the 2000 Brahimi Report. Emphasis was placed on the mandate, force levels and composition, and operational capability. A historic overview contextualised the complex conflict situation in the DRC that the UN was required to help ameliorate. MONUC made a contribution to the termination of internal conflict in the DRC by managing the conflict in a fashion that permitted democratic elections to be held. This was achieved despite the fact that the actual deployment of MONUC (in terms of its functioning, especially regarding DDRRR) did not meet the requirements for a UN force as envisaged by the signatories of the 1999 Lusaka Agreement. The expectations of the signatories regarding DDRRR were not realistic, but the UN response in terms of the mandate and allocation of resources also fell far below what was required to establish a credible UN peace mission. The graduated approach ensured a reactive MONUC posture in the field, but the reticence to provide adequate resources in response to political and operational developments necessitated the external augmentation of the mission on two occasions. While this development brought a new facet of ‘co-deployment’ in UN peacekeeping operations to he fore, it also served to highlight the MONUC deficiencies in terms of its ‘responsibility to protect’ civilians under threat of violence. MONUC was mandated from its inception to discharge this responsibility, without receiving the necessary resources to enable the conduct of operations to protect civilians. This inability resulted in the mission lacking credibility amongst the population of the DRC. Copyright / Dissertation (MSS)--University of Pretoria, 2009. / Political Sciences / MSS / Unrestricted

1 Abstract Humanitarian intervention is one of the most contentious issues of contemporary international politics. The roots of the concept of humanitarian intervention can be traced back to the just war theory. Having examined the practice of states, I lean towards the opinion that the international custom legalizing humanitarian intervention has not fully crystallized. Although the realist school comes up with a few very convincing points, I think that the Charter of the United Nations, as it stands now, does not allow to carry out a humanitarian intervention. The International Court of Justice case law does not consider humanitarian intervention legal. The concept of human security became one of the fundamental sources of legitimization of the Responsibility to Protect doctrine. It also served as one of the principles, upon which the International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty had built the doctrine of The Responsibility to Protect. The principles of the Responsibility to Protect doctrine were passed by the UN General Assembly at the 2005 World Summit. A year later, these principles were referred to in a Security Council resolution on the protection of civilians in armed conflict. Although the United Nations General Assembly resolutions are not legally binding, their come from the fact...

This Master's thesis deals with the emerging international norm Responsibility to Protect (R2P) in French Foreign Policy between 2008 and 2013. Responsibility to Protect was created in 2001 by the International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty and endorsed by the UN World Summit in 2005. It has changed the understanding of state sovereignty in international relations by emphasizing the responsibility component of sovereignty. It gives priority to the security of individuals. France has been an active agenda-setter in the field of human protection norms in the 1980s and 1990s and it has showed a supportive approach towards R2P. The thesis examines whether the conceptualization of R2P in current French foreign policy is coherent with this tradition. The research is based on the concepts of ethical foreign policy and alternative national interest. The analysis of strategic documents setting the priorities of French foreign policy between 2008 and 2013 as well as an examination of the three military interventions based on R2P (Libya, Côte d'Ivoire and Central African Republic) in which France played an active role have shown that in the France's foreign policy is based on moral principles which it upholds in strategic documents. In practice ethical foreign policy also prevails over...

As a permanent member of the UN Security Council, the Russian Federation plays an important role in the debate over humanitarian interventions. These are defined by the Responsibility to Protect principle that allows international military intervention into internal political crisis of other countries in case the security of civilian population is in danger. Russia sent its army to Georgia in 2008 and Crimea in 2014 referring to this principle. However, it was Russia's reluctance to approve any intervention that governed the diplomatic negotiations during the Libyan civil war in 2011. The importance of the problem of various understanding of the R2P principle by different world powers is still crucial and is also clearly visible on the ongoing conflict in Syria. This thesis focuses on the approach of the Russian Federation to the Responsibility to Protect principle. It determines general factors that influence the issue of humanitarian intervention in the framework of Russian foreign policy, and puts Russian attitude to the overall context of the discussion about this principle. The thesis confirms the assumption that the R2P principle has become a Russian foreign policy instrument, which has been misused within the Russian sphere of interest and used to obstruct the interventions initiated by the...

Diploma thesis "United Nations Performance and Responsibility to Protect" applies the research framework of the performance of international organizations on the cases of two humanitarian crises with the involvement of the United Nations in connection to the "Responsibility to Protect" norm. The cases examined, are the intervention in Libya (2011) and the crisis in the Sudanese province of Darfur (2003). The thesis uses the comparative method and evaluates the occurrence and measure of the sources of performance, which it defines in its theoretical framework. Powered by TCPDF (www.tcpdf.org)

[pt] As migrações são movimentos populacionais presentes desde o início da humanidade e foram responsáveis pode moldar a sociedade. Os migrantes precisam e devem ser acolhidos com dignidade, todavia é importante analisar as causas de sua migração como forma de garantir que as pessoas só migrem no exercício de sua livre escolha. Nenhum ser humano deve ser forçado a migrar, a sair do seu país para buscar condições de vida dignas, se expondo aos inúmeros riscos e problemas oriundos desse tipo de migração. A responsabilidade de proteger tem potencial para ser uma ferramenta útil na prevenção de migrações forçadas considerando a segurança humana como uma meta a ser garantida e a soberania como uma responsabilidade e não, um direito absoluto do soberano. Além disso, a segurança humana, através da análise das situações inerentes à sua ausência é um importante sistema de alerta precoce visando a uma atuação com menos efeitos colaterais pela detecção de inseguranças humanas nos estágios iniciais. Embora seja importante a análise ainda que sucinta de alguns casos específicos onde a responsabilidade de proteger tenha sido, ou não, utilizada, o enfoque será prognóstico e focado na potencialidade dos conceitos e princípios, mesmo que nas situações pretéritas eles tenham sido mal utilizados. Como se demonstrará, muitos dos problemas na aplicação da responsabilidade de proteger são oriundos de questões políticas e não, do instituto em si. / [en] Migrations are population movements that exists since the beginning of humanity and were responsible for shaping the society. Migrants need and should be welcomed with dignity, but it is also important to analyze the causes of their migration as a way of ensuring that people only migrate at their free agency. No human being should be forced to migrate, to leave their country in order to seek for a decent living condition, exposing themselves to the numerous risks and problems that this type of migration brings with it. A study of how the responsibility to protect can be an useful tool to prevent forced migrations taking human security as a goal to be guaranteed and sovereignty interpreted as a responsibility, not an absolute right of the sovereign. In addition, human security through the analysis of situations inherent to its absence will be considered as an important early warning system in the search for a way of action with fewer side effects by detecting human insecurities in the early stages. A briefly analyze of some specific cases where the responsibility to protect has been used or not, is important. However, the focus will be prognostic with focus on the potential of the concepts and principles, even if in the past they have been misused. As will be shown, many of the problems in applying the responsibility to protect came from political issues rather than from the concept itself.

This thesis examines the international community's meager response – despite the Responsibility to Protect (R2P) – to the conflict in Tigray. Why was the response minimal, and what could be done to make R2P more efficacious in the future? The R2P framework describes the responsibilities to protect populations around the world against mass atrocity crimes, as stated in Article 5 of the Rome Statute. The study shows that R2P as a framework is flawed, and proposes the creation of an R2P ombudsman to monitor conflicts, focus the international community's attention and assist states that are struggling or failing to protect vulnerable people. The thesis draws upon a theory of political realism but also highlights the sometime significance of shared ethical norms and values.

Thesis (Ph.D. (Political Science)) -- University of Limpopo, 2022 / Much of the literature on the recent Libyan conflict is framed through a Westernised lens. This is an epistemic and ontological setback for Africa. Hence, the transition from the Organisation of African Unity (OAU) to African Union (AU) with the principle of, “African solution to African problems,” seemed to be a plausible one after a number of imported solutions and western powers’ interventions that often left the continent worse off than before. Syria shared a similar situation with Libya but the intervention from the western powers differed significantly. Against this setback, this study employs Afrocentricity as an alternative theoretical lens to examine the incompatibilities of North Atlantic Treaty Organisation’s (NATO) involvement in the Libyan conflict within the context of the African Agenda. The objectives of the study were to evaluate the relations between AU and UNSC on the Libyan crisis, how the UNSC Res 1973 was understood and implemented AU and NATO and to reflect on the implications of NATO led military intervention under the pretext of Responsibility to Protect civilians in Libya. The involvement of NATO’s military force sealed not only the fate of Libyans with no long term plan to the resolution of the crisis but also severely restricted and undermined the efforts of AU in Libya. The efforts of AU and its roadmap were completely negated when NATO forces started their air raids. Divisions were clearly evident within NATO members with Germany and Netherlands opposing the motives of NATO. The intervention by NATO facilitated regime change and flooded the region with illicit trade in arms and goods, harboured armed extremists’ groups, and terrorists. The cauldron of all of the above effectively destabilised the region. It also exposed deep divisions within AU members, lack of coordination and the effects of limited resources on operations that could be handled continentally to avoid unsavoury interventions. In relation to the Libyan crisis, AU and NATO had divergent interests and could not cooperate in finding long lasting solutions. AU should in the future be proactive in resolving conflicts with the continent and should be prepared to fund its own operations in order to reduce dependence on foreign assistance in similar situations in the future.

No description available.

<p>In this thesis I argue that it is an implication of the acceptance of the human right to water and the Responsibility to Protect (R2P) that violations of the human right to water can invoke the Responsibility to Protect. Extreme violations of the right to water can invoke the responsibility to react, and ultimately the responsibility to prevent and rebuild. Although this is the case, I argue that the human right to water is unlikely to invoke R2P on its own. Instead, water issues are more likely to compound with issues of poverty, weak political institutions, poor leadership and social tension to create situations that have the potential for mass atrocity. Furthermore, I provide an analysis of the actions that will need to be taken before, during and after an intervention to fulfill the responsibilities to prevent, react and rebuild and the actors that can and/or should take such action.</p> / Master of Arts (MA)