R2P and the Protection Obligations of Peacekeepers

Abstract

AbstractOne concept, an almost endless range of applications. Or so it may seem. Since R2P was first formulated it has attracted attention from all quarters, especially from those who see it imperative to intervene for humanitarian reasons, owing to a humanitarian impulse. For R2P's advocates, the concept ensures that help is provided for the "right" reasons and, at the same time, avoid the stigma that came with humanitarian intervention. For others, it is merely a smokescreen and thus nothing more than new wine in old bottles. As such, R2P is subject to much misinterpretation and misconceptions about its scope and applicability. Thus, its usefulness depends very much on the perspective taken. Although there are potentially positive elements, the concept's development into a norm, despite the best efforts of its advocates to declare it so, is at best doubtful as its parameters remain largely unclear. This is no more apparent than when trying to forcefully marry peacekeeping missions and their protection obligations vis-á-vis civilians and R2P.