Cookies Policy
X

This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies.

I accept this policy

Find out more here

The Responsibility Not To Veto

No metrics data to plot.
The attempt to load metrics for this article has failed.
The attempt to plot a graph for these metrics has failed.
The full text of this article is not currently available.

Brill’s MyBook program is exclusively available on BrillOnline Books and Journals. Students and scholars affiliated with an institution that has purchased a Brill E-Book on the BrillOnline platform automatically have access to the MyBook option for the title(s) acquired by the Library. Brill MyBook is a print-on-demand paperback copy which is sold at a favorably uniform low price.

Access this article

+ Tax (if applicable)
Add to Favorites
You must be logged in to use this functionality

image of Global Responsibility to Protect

Although the Member States of the United Nations (UN) unanimously endorsed the 'responsibility to protect' (R2P) principle in October 2005, debates continue about its scope, potential impact and how it might be operationalised. This article examines one strand of the wider efforts to turn the responsibility to protect into a workable international agenda, namely, the 'responsibility not to veto'. This is the idea that the permanent five members of the UN Security Council (P5) should agree not to use their veto power to block action in response to genocide and mass atrocities which would otherwise carry a majority in the Council and where their own vital security interests are not engaged. It has been promoted in a variety of international forums for nearly a decade but has not been adopted by the P5. We argue that this idea deserves support although we acknowledge that it addresses only one part of the wider conundrum of preventing mass atrocities. Its primary limitation is that the problem veto abstention is designed to solve – situations where potential rescuers are blocked by a (threat of ) P5 veto – has been a rare occurrence in contemporary world politics. The more common scenario has been that cases of mass atrocities have not generated sufficient political will to mobilise an international military response. Consequently, the responsibility not to veto must form part of a broader range of R2Pfriendly measures to help prevent mass atrocities and rescue their victims should they occur.

10.1163/187598411X586052
/content/journals/10.1163/187598411x586052
dcterms_title,pub_keyword,dcterms_description,pub_author
6
3
Loading
Loading

Full text loading...

/content/journals/10.1163/187598411x586052
Loading

Data & Media loading...

http://brill.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1163/187598411x586052
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1163/187598411x586052
2011-09-01
2016-12-02

Sign-in

Can't access your account?
  • Tools

  • Add to Favorites
  • Printable version
  • Email this page
  • Subscribe to ToC alert
  • Get permissions
  • Recommend to your library

    You must fill out fields marked with: *

    Librarian details
    Your details
    Why are you recommending this title?
    Select reason:
     
    Global Responsibility to Protect — Recommend this title to your library
  • Export citations
  • Key

  • Full access
  • Open Access
  • Partial/No accessInformation