Suchergebnisse

This article identifies the most significant atrocity risk factors and their indicators in accordance with the UN Framework of Analysis for Atrocity Crimes and provides a taxonomy of measures, taken by a variety of external and internal stakeholders, in different combinations, which reduced the risk of atrocity crimes reoccurring after the 2009 stadium massacre in Conakry, Guinea. On the 28th of September 2009, 157 protesters were killed, at least 1200 were injured, and over 100 women were raped by security forces in a stadium in Conakry. The UN's Commission of Inquiry (coi) concluded that these crimes committed by the security forces amounted to crimes against humanity. The efforts to halt further violence and prevent the commission of crimes post-2009 stadium massacre were varied and encompassed regional and international preventive diplomacy. The coordination of a coherent political strategy among international, regional and sub-regional actors in the Guinean context contributed towards the perceived success in preventing further atrocities in Guinea, post-2009 massacre. Importantly, Guinea is not a typical example in terms of atrocity and conflict prevention, due to a unique regional and global dynamics that allowed for a rapid and rather coherent response to the September 2009 stadium massacre.

AbstractDespite its rapid diplomatic rise in the UN setting and global recognition as an established norm, the Responsibility to Protect (R2P) has yet to substantially incorporate gender and directly engage with the complementary Women, Peace, and Security (WPS) agenda. The article discusses this R2P limitation and ways to rectify it through capitalizing on a landmark UN annual report on R2P and cross-cutting areas of engagement with the WPS agenda. To do so, the article proceeds in three sections that mirror the three-pronged classification of overlapping knowledge projects identified for early feminist scholarship. First, the article exposes the extent and effect of masculinist bias in early R2P formulations and R2P's failure to engage explicitly with gender perspectives until the pathbreaking twelfth annual report on R2P. Second, the complementarities between the WPS, gender equality, and R2P are examined in order to highlight the commonalities seen when "adding women" to these agendas. Third, the article examines what gendering the R2P agenda at the United Nations would entail through a reconstruction of R2P that recognizes gender as an analytical and structural category. It is argued that while the progressive 2020 Annual Report on R2P will likely become the reference point for weighing what a gendered R2P agenda should look like, and will hopefully trigger a much-needed reorientation of existing R2P policies as gender-responsive, limitations remain due to three factors: the lack of gender-sensitive analysis at the United Nations, lingering analytical tensions between the WPS and R2P communities, and the current politically resistant climate, which limits a gender audit.

AbstractAs part of the roundtable "The Responsibility to Protect in a Changing World Order: Twenty Years since Its Inception," this essay examines the issue of norm entrepreneurship as it has been used in conjunction with the Responsibility to Protect (RtoP), twenty years after the emergence of The Responsibility to Protect report produced by the International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty (ICISS). It examines norm entrepreneurs with enough drive, motivation, and resources to keep RtoP on the international agenda in a changing world order, after Western middle powers, such as Canada and some European Union member states, had previously acted as indispensable norm entrepreneurs. An examination of both Western and non-Western entrepreneurship efforts to date reveals three key observations. First, RtoP champions are now facing additional challenges in today's transitional global order, where nationalistic foreign policy agendas are replacing liberal agendas, such as RtoP. Second, the drive and adaptability of non-Western norm entrepreneurs with regional ambitions mean that small states can emerge as rather-unexpected RtoP champions. Third, giving non-Western states a visible regional or international platform allows them to display leadership in reframing prevention under the RtoP framework. The last two observations point to the increasing role of non-Western states in global governance and in the promotion of prevention measures to protect the most vulnerable, which in turn increases the legitimacy of the RtoP norm itself.

AbstractDrawing on a notable example of a non-Western normative initiative, Brazil's 'Responsibility while Protecting' (RwP), this article contributes to broadening the scope of the norm dynamics literature beyond its common Western-centric focus. Post-2011 Libya intervention, Brazil proposed RwP to clarify what 'using force' means under the Responsibility to Protect (R2P) banner, but then withdrew from visible norm sponsorship, only to return to this as part of a collective exercise to institutionalise R2P at the United Nations. First, the article highlights the significant role of non-Western agents whose contributions usually go overlooked, yet carry the highest potential to address the legitimacy deficit of norms like R2P. Second, the article proposes adding a new conceptual tool when investigating the role of agency in norm dynamics, one that incorporates a wider range of norm 'shaping' processes and highlights enabling, contingent circumstances. The latter, is argued, best captures the anomalies in contemporary norm contestation. This is illustrated through an empirical analysis of the conditions under which Brazil was able to advance RwP, despite the subsequent emergence of unfavourable circumstances. This article emphasises how significant an alignment of enabling circumstances is to non-Western agents in terms of shaping norm contestation and normative exercise completion.

Abstract
This contribution examines the European Union's engagement with the R2P framework and showcases various examples of progress in support of R2P from the past 15 years. It also illustrates some lingering ambivalence within the EU towards the principle and the divisions which exist across the EU membership regarding some aspects of the R2P agenda, and in particular the role of military force in pursuit of human protection. With the EU currently facing a range of internal and global challenges, its ability to improve policy coherence across the broad range of programmes and activities in support of the R2P agenda, and its ability to shape norms internationally, remain uncertain.

AbstractThis article assesses the EU's engagement with the Responsibility to Protect (R2P) norm and considers the scope for its integration into the EU's activities and global strategy. We examine how the EU's engagement with R2P tests its normative leadership in the context of internal and external political challenges to its authority. We expand on previous studies of the EU's failure to live by example over R2P by adding a missing analytical dimension – trends at the global level – and by suggesting an alternative explanation for the apparent ambivalence towards R2P in some parts of the EU. The EU has engaged with R2P – albeit labelling it differently at times – more than many observers recognize and despite bureaucratic resistance and diverging national approaches. Rather, the fundamental constraint on the EU's role in promoting R2P relates to a transitional international order in which the EU's normative traction is in decline and European foreign policy elites are increasingly pragmatic and cautious.