Power, Global Security, and the Emerging Responsibility to Protect Norm in the UN - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Loading...

PPT – Power, Global Security, and the Emerging Responsibility to Protect Norm in the UN PowerPoint presentation | free to download - id: 2e0b5-ZGE3Z



Loading


The Adobe Flash plugin is needed to view this content

Get the plugin now

View by Category
About This Presentation
Title:

Power, Global Security, and the Emerging Responsibility to Protect Norm in the UN

Description:

The recent crisis in Darfur illustrates that altruism is not the main impetus of ... However, it has not been applied to the crisis in Darfur, 2003-present. ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:55
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 15
Provided by: alinas4
Learn more at: http://www.stanford.edu
Category:

less

Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: Power, Global Security, and the Emerging Responsibility to Protect Norm in the UN


1
Power, Global Security, and the Emerging
Responsibility to Protect Norm in the UN
  • Alina Syunkova
  • Stanford University

2
The Responsibility to Protect and Global Security
  • A shifting security environmentand new national
    strategies for coping with emerging threatshas
    given rise to the formulation of new standards
    of collective behavior. The traditional
    inviolability of state sovereignty has been
    compromised. Nevertheless, as before, it is the
    strategic interests of powerful states, and not
    international norms, that are likely to govern
    interventions.

3
Overview
  • Implications of norm theoretical legitimacy of
    interventions v. questionable practice
  • Papers key arguments, observations norm
    reflects hierarchy, power struggles among UNSC
    Permanent Five
  • Papers conclusions
  • The norms global security implications

4
Responsibility to Protect Implies Sovereignty
as Responsibility
  • IMPLICATION I. right of UNSC to define global
    peace and security threatsrefugee flows, human
    suffering, democratic government ousting, ethnic
    cleansing, international terrorism, and
    proliferation of WMDand authorize action against
    them.
  • IMPLICATION II. controversial moral, if not yet
    legal, right of unauthorized intervention in
    cases of supreme humanitarian emergencies.
  • E.g. Kosovo, 1999 illegal but legitimate.

5
Rhetoric v. Reality
6
Rhetoric v. Reality
  • Despite the general recognition of these
    rights, in practice the UN Security Council has
    been inconsistent in authorizing and conducting
    interventions. The recent crisis in Darfur
    illustrates that altruism is not the main impetus
    of interventions.
  • This paper takes a common view that the norm is
    geopolitically constructed by strategic
    interest-driven states. But, which states and
    what interests gave rise to the responsibility to
    protect norm in international relations?

7
Key Stipulations
  • The responsibility to protect norm in the UN
    arose to counter-balance increasing unilateralism
    and assertiveness of the U.S. in pursuing its
    security goals.
  • The norm reflects strong states strategic
    concern with maintaining or increasing their
    level of power in international society, rather
    than altruism or neo-imperialistic ambitions.

8
Paper Empirical Findings
  • The papers approach was to analyze the stance of
    each of the Permanent Five at the regional
    roundtables conducted by the ICISS in 2001.
  • China and the U.S. were mostly opposed to the
    norm Great Britain and France were its key
    advocates and Russias stance was generally
    western, reflecting a shift away from former
    Soviet ideology, and a willingness to embrace of
    the principles of international society.

9
Paper Empirical Findings
  • Contrary to common belief, the norm does not
    primarily reflect U.S. neo-imperial interests
    materially strained and lacking domestic
    political support, it is wary of codified
    interventionism.
  • Surprisingly, Russia has great incentives to
    endorse the norm, strategically cooperating with
    international society.

ICISS Co-Chairs G. Evans (right), M. Sahnoun
(left) J. Manley, Minister of Foreign Affairs of
Canada (center).
10
Permanent Five Hierarchy
  • Power-maintenance struggles among the worlds
    five most powerful states are manifested in the
    rise of the responsibility to protect norm.

11
Case-Study Failure of the Norm in Darfur,
2003-present
  • Since 2001, the responsibility to protect norm
    has become widely recognized. E.g. in March 2005
    Kofi Annan urged nations to endorse the
    responsibility to protect in his statement to the
    UN General Assembly, and in his report, In Larger
    Freedom.
  • However, it has not been applied to the crisis in
    Darfur, 2003-present. The U.S., UN, and EU have
    relinquished action to the AU.
  • This supports the argument that the
    responsibility to protect has in reality little
    to do with the imperative to intervene on
    altruistic or imperialistic grounds.

12
The Responsibility to Protect and the Future of
Global Security
  • A shifting security environmentimplying new
    strategies for coping with emerging threatshas
    necessitated new standards of behavior in world
    policing. Most importantly, new norms have
    compromised the historic inviolability of state
    sovereignty. Nevertheless, as before, it is the
    strategic interests of powerful states, and not
    international norms, that are likely to govern
    interventions.

13
Is humanitarian intervention an unrealistic
concept?
14
End of Presentation
  • Power, Security, and the Emerging Responsibility
    to Protect in the UN.
  • By
  • Alina Syunkova
  • Stanford University
About PowerShow.com