Responsibility to Protect (R2P) consists of three non-sequential pillars: the responsibility of the state to protect its population from genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing, and crimes against humanity; the responsibility of the international community to assist the state in fulfilling its
The 2005 UN World Summit Outcome endorsed the principle of the responsibility to protect (R2P) based upon a clear definition that is relevant to a narrow and specific range of atrocities. The agreement emphasised not intervention but assistance in the prevention of such atrocities, in the
troubled legacy of intervention in Libya. That sentiment was always evident to some extent in debates on R2P. The principle’s earliest advocates went to considerable lengths to distinguish it from the bad old days of ‘humanitarian intervention’ in part to assuage fears and in part to burnish R2P’s apparent
Formulated by the International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty ( iciss ) in 2001,
Responsibility to Protect (R2P) was institutionalised as a political norm in the 2005 UN World Summit Outcome Document ( wsod ).
Since then, it has been
and non-intervention prohibit States from intervening in another State, regardless of what atrocities may be occurring there. This view is being challenged by an emerging practice of States choosing to act in response to atrocity crimes occurring in other States, consistent with R2P.
Since its unanimous adoption in 2005 by more than 150 heads of state, the Responsibility to Protect (R2P) has been characterised as one of the fastest-growing ideas in the normative arena.
Building on the notion of ‘sovereignty as responsibility’, R2P is part of a larger global trend
atrocities. This was apparent very early in the crisis. The Office of the United Nations Special Adviser for the Prevention of Genocide and Responsibility to Protect (R2P), for instance, issued eight statements regarding Syria between 2011 and 2013,
and the Obama administration wrestled publicly with
requiring urgent responses, including military intervention, the R2P principles point the way forward. 1
Since the end of World War II, the world has been faced with the challenge of averting the type of human tragedies – massive loss of lives and suffering that characterised the
apparently aggressive response by the Libyan authorities. 2 This resolution and the subsequent enforcement of a no-fly zone by the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) forces is one of the first operational applications of the Responsibility to Protect (known as R2P).
The intervention in Libya