r2p and rwanda genocide (1 Viewer)

[ineedtostudy123]

so i'm confused about where to use r2p and the rwanda genocide. what kind of question would have to be asked to talk about responsibility to protect and the rwanda genocide?

 

[specificagent1]

they can either ask specifically for r2p as it's a contemporary issue or ask overall as a question about the international's community ability to respond. You can use R2p as one of your paragraphs in that case and use your other paragraphs to talk about other things such as the UN or other stuff

 

[zizi2003_]

so i'm confused about where to use r2p and the rwanda genocide. what kind of question would have to be asked to talk about responsibility to protect and the rwanda genocide?

r2p is a good example for questions which ask about the effectiveness of the UN in enforcing human rights (since the security council can intervene in human rights abuses to reflect the concerns and moral/ethical standards of the international community)
it's also good for state sovereignty questions- even tho the UN Charter explicitly requires the international agencies to not intervene in state matters, the R2P example demonstrates that state sovereignty is not absolute

 

[specificagent1]

r2p is a good example for questions which ask about the effectiveness of the UN in enforcing human rights (since the security council can intervene in human rights abuses to reflect the concerns and moral/ethical standards of the international community)
it's also good for state sovereignty questions- even tho the UN Charter explicitly requires the international agencies to not intervene in state matters, the R2P example demonstrates that state sovereignty is not absolute

R2P is not strictly UN even though the UN can via the security council reach such resolution. It is rather a principle the international community adopted at the 2005 world summit. See NATO intervention in Libya which was UN authorised but enforced by NATO and allies. UN resolution does not equal enforcement. UN Resolutions are dependent on states to contribute to

 

[zizi2003_]

R2P is not strictly UN even though the UN can via the security council reach such resolution. It is rather a principle the international community adopted at the 2005 world summit. See NATO intervention in Libya which was UN authorised but enforced by NATO and allies. UN resolution does not equal enforcement. UN Resolutions are dependent on states to contribute to

The NATO intervention and air operation in Libya was authorised by the UN tho- the Resolution 1973 (codifying the R2P, thus is part of a UN policy) explicitly requires the security council to authorise military intervention (with only 10 votes required) + NATO’s peacekeeping forces are essentially deployed by the UN under the Resolution 1973 meaning any enforcements powers were only allowed by the UN
but yea, it's true that the r2p is not an effective form of enforcing human rights (since the Libya intervention was heavily criticised for the excessive use of force), but it's nevertheless still an international mechanism of enforcing compliance
See https://www.un.org/press/en/2011/sc10200.doc.htm

 

[specificagent1]

The NATO intervention and air operation in Libya was authorised by the UN tho- the Resolution 1973 (codifying the R2P, thus is part of a UN policy) explicitly requires the security council to authorise military intervention (with only 10 votes required) + NATO’s peacekeeping forces are essentially deployed by the UN under the Resolution 1973 meaning any enforcements powers were only allowed by the UN
but yea, it's true that the r2p is not an effective form of enforcing human rights (since the Libya intervention was heavily criticised for the excessive use of force), but it's nevertheless still an international mechanism of enforcing compliance
See https://www.un.org/press/en/2011/sc10200.doc.htm

yes but this doesnt mean that goups like nato cant intervene on their own merits

 

[uniqueusername1]

The NATO intervention and air operation in Libya was authorised by the UN tho- the Resolution 1973 (codifying the R2P, thus is part of a UN policy) explicitly requires the security council to authorise military intervention (with only 10 votes required) + NATO’s peacekeeping forces are essentially deployed by the UN under the Resolution 1973 meaning any enforcements powers were only allowed by the UN
but yea, it's true that the r2p is not an effective form of enforcing human rights (since the Libya intervention was heavily criticised for the excessive use of force), but it's nevertheless still an international mechanism of enforcing compliance
See https://www.un.org/press/en/2011/sc10200.doc.htm

yo zizi don't you love legal? Become a lawyer

I need 1-2 high-quality lawyers to back me up once i rob a bank

 

[specificagent1]

yes but this doesnt mean that goups like nato cant intervene on their own merits

see NATO intervention in yugoslavia which did not have UN security council authorisation

 

[zizi2003_]

yes but this doesnt mean that goups like nato cant intervene on their own merits

see NATO intervention in yugoslavia which did not have UN security council authorisation

ur right bro but that intervention was illegal the UN charter and 1973 resolution is binding on the NATO, meaning they cannot legally intervene on their 'own merits', they need authorisation by the security council

 

[zizi2003_]

yo zizi don't you love legal? Become a lawyer

I need 1-2 high-quality lawyers to back me up once i rob a bank

ok done @iwanttodogoodinschool and i will be your lawyers, but make sure to give us some of dat money

 

[specificagent1]

ur right bro but that intervention was illegal the UN charter and 1973 resolution is binding on the NATO, meaning they cannot legally intervene on their 'own merits', they need authorisation by the security council

you enforcing that bro?

 

[uniqueusername1]

yo zizi don't you love legal? Become a lawyer

I need 1-2 high-quality lawyers to back me up once i rob a bank

mate 100%

33.3% each

after holidays commence operation is a go