The Principle of Responsibility to Protect: Implementation Perspective in Middle East and North Africa

Abstract

This thesis analyzes the principle of responsibility to protect (R2P) in theory and practice. The research includes a review of the history and development of the principle, its status as an international norm, as well as the primary criticisms against its use, including its perceived conflict with the long-standing rules of sovereignty and non-intervention. This background is followed by an examination of the application of R2P in specific crises situations of the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) region, namely the cases of Libya, Syria, Sudan (Darfur) and South Sudan. The research focuses on an analysis of the inconsistent application of the R2P principle in these situations and why that occurs, specifically in regard to the following factors – (1) the UN Security Council’s determination of whether or not to authorize the use of force to intervene when a state is perpetrating mass atrocity crimes against its own civilians, emphasizing the role of the veto power over that decision; and (2) the involvement regional organizations and neighboring states play in the determination of how R2P will be applied and when or if forceful intervention will be utilized. The role political will plays in both factors will be examined. The latter factor will be explored through an analysis of the involvement of the Arab League in the focused studies in the MENA region. The perspective of the Arab community regarding R2P implementation is fraught with concerns about regime change, accountability, and inconsistency. To that end recommendations are suggested as to factors that may improve these issues and encourage further use of the principle by the international community and the Arab League in future situations.