Vad är viktigare än människoliv? - En kritisk analys av kritik mot Responsibility to Protect
(2018) LAGF03 20182Department of Law
Faculty of Law
- Abstract (Swedish)
- Under början av 2000-talet växte konceptet Responsibility to Protect (R2P) fram i syfte att stärka skyddet för befolkningar i vissa särskilt utsatta situationer. Genom konceptet skulle det internationella samfundet åläggas en skyldighet att skydda människor. Konceptet har dock sedan dess tillkomst kritiserats flitigt i den internationella debatten och har fortfarande inte uppnått rättslig status.
Syftet med denna uppsats är att fördjupa förståelsen för R2P samt viss framträdande kritik mot R2P. För att uppfylla syftet analyseras och diskuteras tre framträdande argument mot R2P kritiskt. Det utreds bland annat frågor om kritikens hållbarhet och underliggande premisser, men den mest centrala frågeställningen är: Vilka konsekvenser kan... (More) - Under början av 2000-talet växte konceptet Responsibility to Protect (R2P) fram i syfte att stärka skyddet för befolkningar i vissa särskilt utsatta situationer. Genom konceptet skulle det internationella samfundet åläggas en skyldighet att skydda människor. Konceptet har dock sedan dess tillkomst kritiserats flitigt i den internationella debatten och har fortfarande inte uppnått rättslig status.
Syftet med denna uppsats är att fördjupa förståelsen för R2P samt viss framträdande kritik mot R2P. För att uppfylla syftet analyseras och diskuteras tre framträdande argument mot R2P kritiskt. Det utreds bland annat frågor om kritikens hållbarhet och underliggande premisser, men den mest centrala frågeställningen är: Vilka konsekvenser kan antas följa av att den utvalda kritiken tillmäts större betydelse i praktiken?
Framställningen är strukturerad utifrån en teori om att R2P är ett uttryck för ett moraliskt imperativ att skydda människor och är främst baserad på rättsvetenskaplig litteratur, FN-dokument och rapporter. Detta material har behandlats med hjälp av en egen analysmodell bestående av huvudsakligen konsekvens- och argumentationsanalys samt rättsdogmatisk och -filosofisk metod.
Uppsatsen innefattar en översiktlig redogörelse för R2P, vilken syftar till att lägga en kunskapsgrund inför den fördjupande diskussionen. I redogörelsen förklaras vissa relevanta folkrättsliga utgångspunkter, huvuddragen i R2P:s uppkomst och utveckling samt innebörden av R2P.
I diskussionen analyseras de tre argumenten: R2P medför en risk för nykolonialism, R2P har försvagats av sin egen utveckling och tillämpning av R2P riskerar att resultera i oönskade konsekvenser. Diskussionen visar bland annat att en konsekvens av kritiken kan antas vara en minskad sannolikhet för R2P:s framtida tillämpning och en ökad risk för att det moraliska imperativet inte uppfylls. Vidare visas även att någon form av avvägning är oumbärlig om hänsyn ska kunna tas till flera motstående intressen. Av detta resultat dras slutsatsen att kritiken inte borde användas som ett argument för att överge R2P, med mindre något mer effektivt tillvägagångssätt finns att tillgå. (Less) - Abstract
- During the beginning of the 21st century, the concept of Responsibility to Protect (R2P) emerged with the purpose of strengthening the protection of populations at certain risk. Through the concept, the international community was supposed to carry a responsibility to protect human beings. However, the concept has been highly criticized in the international debate ever since its foundation and has still not reached the status of a legally binding norm.
The purpose of this essay is to create a more in-depth understanding of R2P and its criticism. In order to fulfill this purpose, three prominent arguments against R2P are analyzed and critically discussed. Although issues concerning the plausibility and prerequisites of the arguments are... (More) - During the beginning of the 21st century, the concept of Responsibility to Protect (R2P) emerged with the purpose of strengthening the protection of populations at certain risk. Through the concept, the international community was supposed to carry a responsibility to protect human beings. However, the concept has been highly criticized in the international debate ever since its foundation and has still not reached the status of a legally binding norm.
The purpose of this essay is to create a more in-depth understanding of R2P and its criticism. In order to fulfill this purpose, three prominent arguments against R2P are analyzed and critically discussed. Although issues concerning the plausibility and prerequisites of the arguments are examined, the most essential question is: If the discussed criticism is given greater significance in practice, which consequences are likely to follow?
The structure of the essay is founded upon a theory implicating that R2P is an expression of a moral imperative to protect human beings. Furthermore, the text is mainly based on legal literature, UN-documents and reports. This material has been examined through a self-structured model for analysis, mainly consisting of consequence- and argument analysis together with legal dogmatic method and methodology of legal philosophy.
The essay includes an overview of R2P, which facilitates the understanding of the more in-depth discussion. The overview explains certain relevant and fundamental principles of public international law, the main outlines of R2P’s history and the main contents of the concept itself.
In the discussion, three arguments are analyzed: R2P entails a risk of neo-colonialism, R2P has been weakened by its own development and the application of R2P entails a risk of undesired consequences. The discussion shows that one consequence, which is likely to follow from the criticism, is a reduced likelihood of R2P being applied in the future and an increased risk of the moral imperative not being fulfilled. Furthermore, it is shown that some sort of balancing is inevitable, if account should be taken to various opposing interests. From this result, it is concluded that the criticism should not be used as an argument for abandoning R2P. That is, as long as there is no other more efficient procedure available. (Less)
Please use this url to cite or link to this publication:
http://lup.lub.lu.se/student-papers/record/8964725
- author
- Ström, Alexander LU
- supervisor
-
- Karol Nowak LU
- organization
- course
- LAGF03 20182
- year
- 2018
- type
- M2 - Bachelor Degree
- subject
- keywords
- Folkrätt, Public International Law, Responsibility to Protect, R2P, skyldighet att skydda, statssuveränitet, humanitär intervention, nykolonialism, regimskifte.
- language
- Swedish
- id
- 8964725
- date added to LUP
- 2019-03-10 13:51:49
- date last changed
- 2019-03-10 13:51:49
@misc{8964725,
abstract = {{During the beginning of the 21st century, the concept of Responsibility to Protect (R2P) emerged with the purpose of strengthening the protection of populations at certain risk. Through the concept, the international community was supposed to carry a responsibility to protect human beings. However, the concept has been highly criticized in the international debate ever since its foundation and has still not reached the status of a legally binding norm.
The purpose of this essay is to create a more in-depth understanding of R2P and its criticism. In order to fulfill this purpose, three prominent arguments against R2P are analyzed and critically discussed. Although issues concerning the plausibility and prerequisites of the arguments are examined, the most essential question is: If the discussed criticism is given greater significance in practice, which consequences are likely to follow?
The structure of the essay is founded upon a theory implicating that R2P is an expression of a moral imperative to protect human beings. Furthermore, the text is mainly based on legal literature, UN-documents and reports. This material has been examined through a self-structured model for analysis, mainly consisting of consequence- and argument analysis together with legal dogmatic method and methodology of legal philosophy.
The essay includes an overview of R2P, which facilitates the understanding of the more in-depth discussion. The overview explains certain relevant and fundamental principles of public international law, the main outlines of R2P’s history and the main contents of the concept itself.
In the discussion, three arguments are analyzed: R2P entails a risk of neo-colonialism, R2P has been weakened by its own development and the application of R2P entails a risk of undesired consequences. The discussion shows that one consequence, which is likely to follow from the criticism, is a reduced likelihood of R2P being applied in the future and an increased risk of the moral imperative not being fulfilled. Furthermore, it is shown that some sort of balancing is inevitable, if account should be taken to various opposing interests. From this result, it is concluded that the criticism should not be used as an argument for abandoning R2P. That is, as long as there is no other more efficient procedure available.}},
author = {{Ström, Alexander}},
language = {{swe}},
note = {{Student Paper}},
title = {{Vad är viktigare än människoliv? - En kritisk analys av kritik mot Responsibility to Protect}},
year = {{2018}},
}