The Responsibility to Protect doctrine represents a leap forward in accountability for states and does not infringe upon their sovereignty, as states are no longer held to be completely self-contained entities with absolute power over their populations. Rather, there is a strictly defined corpus of actions that begin the R2P process — a process that has different levels of corrective action undertaken by the international community in order to persuade, cajole and finally coerce states into actively taking steps to prevent atrocities from occurring within their boundaries. That R2P does not violate sovereignty stems from the evolution of sovereignty from its Westphalian form in the mid 17th century to the “sovereignty as responsibility” concept advanced by Deng, et al. Modern sovereignty can no longer be held to give states carte blanche in their internal affairs regardless of the level of suffering going on within their borders.That's a mouthful, if you intend to apply it to real states.
Doctrine
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
It seems to mean "we will do as we please, you will not."
What is this drivel? The author refers to himself in a bunch of unflattering ways, to which I will add "Idiot".
I really want fools like this to, as the line goes, "Grab a weapon and stand a post".
Or better yet, go be a guard for somebody like those medical people getting killed for giving out polio shots in Pakistan.
Deeds, not words.
The author needs to go back and read his Aesops Fables. I point to "The Wild Ass and the Lion" (moral of the story- "Might makes right"). No might, no results.
Post a Comment