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

Full Access Responsibility to Protect

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.

Responsibility to Protect

  • HTML
  • PDF
Add to Favorites
You must be logged in to use this functionality

A Humanitarian overview

image of Global Responsibility to Protect

Where does the humanitarian community sit in relation to continuing debates about the Responsibility to Protect (R2P)? The third pillar of R2P is often seen as the practical manifestation of an older idea of humanitarian intervention, given much attention after the Rwandan genocide and Srebrenica. Many humanitarians have long been reticent about the idea of so-called humanitarian intervention and, thus, of R2P. This article examines the logic behind this reticence and explores the practical relationship between R2P and humanitarian action. In particular, it focuses on three major crises during Holmes’s time as Emergency Relief Coordination – Darfur, Sri Lanka and Myanmar – and goes on to consider briefly how and why R2P has been invoked, or not, in the more recent crises of Libya and Syria. It concludes with reflections about the implications for the future.

Affiliations: 1: The Ditchley Foundation director@ditchley.co.uk

10.1163/1875984X-00602003
/content/journals/10.1163/1875984x-00602003
dcterms_title,pub_keyword,dcterms_description,pub_author
10
5
Loading

Where does the humanitarian community sit in relation to continuing debates about the Responsibility to Protect (R2P)? The third pillar of R2P is often seen as the practical manifestation of an older idea of humanitarian intervention, given much attention after the Rwandan genocide and Srebrenica. Many humanitarians have long been reticent about the idea of so-called humanitarian intervention and, thus, of R2P. This article examines the logic behind this reticence and explores the practical relationship between R2P and humanitarian action. In particular, it focuses on three major crises during Holmes’s time as Emergency Relief Coordination – Darfur, Sri Lanka and Myanmar – and goes on to consider briefly how and why R2P has been invoked, or not, in the more recent crises of Libya and Syria. It concludes with reflections about the implications for the future.

Loading

Full text loading...

/deliver/journals/1875984x/6/2/1875984X_006_02_S003_text.html?itemId=/content/journals/10.1163/1875984x-00602003&mimeType=html&fmt=ahah
/content/journals/10.1163/1875984x-00602003
Loading

Data & Media loading...

http://brill.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1163/1875984x-00602003
Loading
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1163/1875984x-00602003
2014-06-12
2017-12-18

Sign-in

Can't access your account?
  • Key

  • Full access
  • Open Access
  • Partial/No accessInformation