The aim of this work is to determine whether the concept of Responsibility to Protect is able to explain why in case of the Syrian civil conflict the international community did not intervene in a similar manner as it did in Libya. Primarily, the theoretical framework is defined using the concept of Responsibility to Protect. In order to answer the research question, all criteria applied in the analysis were operationalized in accordance with the Report of the International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty and the Outcome Document from 2005. At the same time, concept of state sovereignty and humanitarian intervention is designed. Although the conflicts in Libya and Syria started simultaneously in 2011 during the rule of authoritarian regimes, the intrastate situations were not identical. Based on the analysis of two case studies, I came to the conclusion that the concept of Responsibility to Protect is able to sufficiently explain the different reaction of the international community, which confirmed my hypothesis. Specifically, it is the principle of right authority, which was not fulfilled in Syria, while it is necessary to note the criterion of reasonable prospect becomes with the gradual development of the conflict more and more problematic. In contrast, the intervention in...
| Identifer | oai:union.ndltd.org:nusl.cz/oai:invenio.nusl.cz:350550 |
| Date | January 2016 |
| Creators | Kotrčová, Barbora |
| Contributors | Střítecký, Vít, Karásek, Tomáš |
| Source Sets | Czech ETDs |
| Language | English |
| Detected Language | English |
| Type | info:eu-repo/semantics/masterThesis |
| Rights | info:eu-repo/semantics/restrictedAccess |
Page generated in 0.0014 seconds