Implementing the Responsibility to Protect - Essay Example

The UN Secretary-General Report “Implementing the Responsibility to Protect” (2009) Introduction During the post-cold war period, most countries demanded sovereignty and protection from all forms of external aggression. In the UN summit, all the governments and Heads of States saw the need for each state to protect the citizens from genocide, ethnic cleansing, crimes against humanity and war crimes (Krasner 671). Indeed, the assurance of sovereignty protects the small states from the dictatorial rule that the dominant states would exercise on them. Essentially, the sovereign country should have inbuilt mechanisms of fighting crimes, however, it may seek international assistance where the threat is significant and worries the state security. The implication is that, each state has to build a strong and reliable coordination with other countries, whose help becomes essential during war. Therefore, one can argue strongly that sovereignty should not bar the state from forging strong relationship with the other countries. In addition, inappropriate use of sovereignty would mean protecting the self-interest at the expense of the citizens. Therefore, this report is a critical evaluation and description of issues relating to sovereignty, as contained in The UN Secretary-General Report “Implementing the Responsibility to Protect” (2009). Key Catalysts Some of the key catalysts to sovereignty include the political will, need for international integration and ethnic co-existence. Fundamentally, the leadership will and peaceful co-existence ensures that the sovereign state remains peaceful and coherent. In addition, it would enable the state to build a proper relationship with other states, thereby, being in a position of getting international assistance during emergency. Furthermore, this would enhance international integration among different countries. Implication of the report for contemporary status of sovereignty Legally, the states are obliged to use sovereignty for the interest of the people, safeguard them and ensure that they free to live and interact in the country (Chandler 44). The protection is legal and spelt out in the constitution, thereby, being credible and legitimate. In the contemporary society, Jackson acknowledges that there are State powers that do not use their sovereignty for the good of the people (Jackson 21). For example, some developing states literally misuse sovereignty to achieve personal or ethnic gains, with disregards to the public. Indeed, the theory of balance of power explains the misuse of state sovereignty resulting from the differences in power factions within the country (Brown 9). The theory suggests that those differences cause civil unrest, when the leaders test their power and dominance. In the UN report, some states, especially with dictatorial regimes, inflict violence on the people with impunity due to the powers that the Head of State has on the subjects. Often, there are silent state machineries that such countries use to fulfill the mission, such as, illegitimately organized gang supported by the state security organs (Krasner 673). In such cases, the state does not use its sovereignty in protecting the people as the international law requires. Therefore, the United Nations may be forced to intervene and restore peace in the country. Notably, most countries, despite their fight for sovereignty, have failed to protect their citizens against war crimes. For example, the mass killings of the ordinary citizens in Rwanda, Cambodia, Srebrenica and Darfur show that, the states have failed in their protective responsibility, thus, their sovereignty is questionable. Sometimes, the crimes are committed when the Security Council and the UN peacekeepers are watching, as was the case in Rwanda and Srebrenica (UN report 4). As a preventative measure to the occurrence of such crimes, the UN should take the leading role in cautioning the states on negligence, not regarding the states’ sovereignty as a surety of applying diplomacy in controlling the violence that may spread in the country. The report cite the International Law, which quarantines the member states to seek policy, doctrinal and perhaps, institutional life that mandates it to protect the lives of the ordinary citizens (UN report 4). Does this means that the states are insensitive to the internal security of the people? Absolutely no, the problem remains the abuse of sovereignty that most states employ in protecting the leaders intent. Basically, the application diplomacy in offering solution to domestic and international problems in the country indicates strength of the state (Chandler 48). As well, it shows that the country respects the human rights and capable of protecting the boarders against aggression. Obviously, protecting the states’ boarders and the people is the essence of sovereignty, and once not achieved, the country loses it sovereignty, forcing the International Community to intervene. Under the customary and international law, the sovereign state has the power protect the people from war and punish the perpetrators of such crimes (UN report 5). However, most countries have limitation to carry out such authorities. The authority is unable to punish crimes against humanity because they cannot investigate the offense properly, to get the people bearing the greatest responsibility (Jackson 17). Sometimes, the people involved are of high ranking in the states, thus, incapacitating the activities of the investigators. At that level, the criminals escape domestic punishment, hence, calling for the involvement of the international bodies, including the United Nations and the International Criminal Court, to punish such high profile crimes (Krasner 678). Considering the submission, the state cannot be judged merely on its sovereignty, but, the ability to use the status in solving the people’s problems, and protecting the boarders (Herir and Robinson 7). Therefore, sovereignty is not only having self-power, but, exercising the power for the good of the public. Sovereignty is about being responsible in formulating workable internal policies, which gives alternative means of solving conflicts, and enjoying some international privileges (UN report 6). However, currently, various sovereign states, despite their policies, find it difficult in solving internal and boarder disputes, making them to seek international intervention. According to the report, military intervention is necessary in protecting the civilians, even if the state is sovereign (UN report 7). Indeed, the involvement of the international bodies, in solving the internal and boarder conflicts, is a clear indication that the sovereign states cannot accomplish the civilian protection mandate. Therefore, their sovereignty loses the meaning and that is mostly evidenced in developing countries, including Rwanda, Somalia, Kosovo, Afghanistan, and Bosnia. In protecting the people in such countries, the use of military is justified despite its controversial nature (Chesterman 19). The report suggests that the military action in protecting lives in failed states is “a contest between the state and individual sovereignty” (UN report 7). However, that might not be the truth. The individuals might be protesting the bad leadership that the state authority imposes on the people. Besides, it might be a fight for freedom of the dictatorial authority, thus, actually negating the belief that it is a power contest. Once the military operation is accomplished, the sovereign state starts the reconstruction with assistance from the international development partners. Factually, it forces the country to forge a closer working relationship with the development parties, through upholding the principles of international relations, including transparency, persuasion and joint coordination (Zaum 41). The report, further affirms that the sovereignty is the State responsibility that differs significantly from humanitarian intervention. Mostly, the state might function below the required limit in protecting the people (Herir and Robinson 11). For instance, the group staging opposition to the authority of the sovereign state might be heavily armed and overpower the head of state such as the then situation in Somalia. Under such circumstances, the sovereignty of the state is threatened and international assistance becomes appropriate, in restoring the state security. Mostly, sovereignty failure undermines international relations because; the developed countries would feel skeptical in working with the states where the human rights is not given priority. Often, such countries are categorized as those that cannot protect the basic rights of the citizens, therefore, have failed in their primary responsibility (UN report 11). In order to succeed in this task, Chesterman asserts that every sovereign state would re-define the strategy of ensuring that the ordinary citizens are safe as the international law states (Chesterman 29). Much as a sovereign state would do, in defending the role and success in adhering to the international treaties, they cannot gain the respectable status if the authority does not protect the lives of ordinary citizens from internal conflict, and the external aggression (Cunliffe et al., 21). Absolutely, the law regarding the basic rights of protection is clear and coherent, forcing the countries either to abide by them, or, fail the international relations test. Once the sovereign country fails on their primary role of protecting the people, they lose the ground on negotiating any international diplomacy in aggrieved countries. In addition, Cunliffe and others explain that the legitimacy that the country enjoys is reduced during war, perhaps; the country might be out of control on issues relating to boarder conflicts (Cunliffe et al., 24). In such cases, the affected countries, whether sovereign or not, realize the need for international mediation in supplementing the role of protection. Responsible sovereignty could be attributed to act of inclusive politics, non-discrimination policies, equal rights and treatments, protection of the ordinary people and adherence to the International laws (UN report 11). In respect to this, international recognition and respect is only achieved when the sovereign state proves responsible. Furthermore, the responsible sovereignty does not tolerate impunity and the perpetrators of criminal acts, and would impose serious punishment on such people (UN report 23). Indeed, the sovereign state has to prevent all forms of incitements that would lead to human rights violation and criminal acts. At that stage, the internal state programs including political processes, reconciliation and healing has space to be achieved. The responsibility to protect is sometimes enforced using the military when the state has failed. In such cases, the use of coercion is applied to restore order and respect, thereby, averting insecurity and further loss of life during conflict and the post conflict period. In addition, responsible sovereignty helps in ending the human rights violation (UN report 28). The report further gives hope for the member states by acknowledging that respect to the human rights, peace building, humanitarian affairs and political development could only be achieved when the sovereign state is responsible for the people’s needs (UN report 29). International Relations Concept All the sovereign states should adhere to the provisions of the international community, to strengthen the relations. Indeed, the cordial relationship and foreign assistance that most countries enjoy, depend on the respect to the international agreements that the country signs. Brown suggested that, the approach that each country use in enforcing ties with other nations shows the extent to which the country could get humanitarian or military assistance, during internal feuds or external aggression on the country’s sovereignty (Brown 14). Therefore, the sovereign countries have to respect the international charter and work in harmony with other international bodies, in ensuring peace and stability. Consequently, the roles and relationship that the various governments have might help them to achieve economic development and assistance, from the developed partners (UN report 29). Academic Reaction In academics, state sovereignty is considered vital for internal planning and suppressing minimal tension that countries have. In addition, responsible sovereignty shows that the state is sensitive to the role of ensuring that the people are protected from all manners of aggression, whether originating from within, or from an external source. Notably, there are countries, especially those ruled in dictatorial manner, literally abuse the sovereignty. Usually, the ordinary citizens in such country undergo untold suffering because of poor leadership. The success in most countries originates from the basic solutions that it offers regarding the welfare of the citizens. For example, the United States’ sovereignty is respected and recognized worldwide because, there is total respect to the human the population and high sensitivity to matters of state security, within, and from the boarders. In essence, one note that the nature of development that the country achieve, depend on the state security that ensures favorable business environment. Conclusion In summary, sovereignty of the state and international relations that it builds with other states is a very important consideration in evaluating the extent of economic development. In war-ravaged states, the issue of sovereignty is undermined as they seek external help in dealing with the problem. Therefore, the country is incapacitated in protecting the people and has to rely on military aid from foreign countries. In addition, its relations with other countries become affected in terms of business operation and humanitarian needs. Indeed, most of the countries become skeptical in working with the country, which they might call a failed state. Moreover, the country cannot build its reputation in the international scene due to the category under which it is classified. Works Cited Brown, Chris. Sovereignty, Rights and Justice, polity. New York: Rowman and Littlefield Publishers, 2006. Chandler, David. International State-building. New York: Routledge, 2010. Print. Chesterman, Simon. Just War or Just Peace? New York: Oxford University Press, 2002. Cunliffe, Philip., et al., Politics Without Sovereignty. London: UCL Press, 2007. Print. Herir, A., and Robinson, N. State-building: Theory and practice. New York: Routledge, 2009. Print. Jackson, Robert. Sovereignty: Evolution of an Idea. Cambridge: Polity Press, 2007. Print. Krasner, Stephen. Sovereignty: Organized Hypocrisy? Princeton University Press. 63. 2 (1999): 630-699. United Nations Report. Implementing the Responsibility to Protect (2009). Zaum, Dominick. The Sovereignty Paradox. Oxford University Press, 2007. Print. Read More