Responsibility to protect

Why Haiti in 1991-1996? Why specifically 1993-1994?

Facts• On 1990 Jean-Bertrand Aristide elected

democratically as President of Haiti state• Coups d’état in 1991- Aristide expelled• OAS and UNSC condemned the coup

1993: economic sanctions res. 841 §1, SC acting under Chapter

VII takes into account all previous GA + OAS res. + § 5-9 trade embargo

res. 875 §1, SC under chapter VII and VIII calls all MS to halt inward maritime shipping as necessary in order to inspect and verify their cargoes and destinations

1994, res. 917 again economic sanctions §2-10 res.940 by SC :• «  Acting under Chapter VII of the Charter of the United

Nations, authorizes Member States to form a multinational force under unified command and control and, in this framework, to use all necessary means to facilitate the departure from Haiti of the military leadership, consistent with the Governors Island Agreement, the prompt return of the legitimately elected President and the restoration of the legitimate authorities of the Government of Haiti, and to establish and maintain a secure and stable environment that will permit implementation of the Governors Island Agreement, on the understanding that the cost of implementing this temporary operation will be borne by the participating Member States »

Res. 841: Due to the failure of OR efforts, humanitarian crisis, number of refuges and that the legitimate grnm was not reinstated, SC under chapter VII threat of international peace and security.

But , is important that SC (res. 940) acting under chapter VII : authorize the use of all means for the “departure from Haiti of the military leadership, consistent with the Governors Island Agreement and return of the legitimately elected President”

In this case, SC “stretched” the concept of humanitarian intervention so as to include democracy.

Why Darfur? • Holocaust after GF, Rwanda, Kosovo, Srebrenica,

Bosnia-Hertzegovina = « never again  »• Darfur is a case when media + CS and others first

invoke to R2P• Mainly cause is the first test for r2p

Facts• 2003 SLA + JEM attacked government military

installations• Government replied by arming +supporting

janjaweed militias• Several attempts to negotiate a ceasefire on late

2003 • 300,000 dead and 2,5 million of displaced persons

by this conflict• Darfur peace Agreement on 2006

2004 1547 §6: to bring an immediate halt to the fighting in

Darfur 1556 §6: Demands that the Government of Sudan

fulfill its commitments to disarm the Janjaweed militias;

Is like giving the r2p for darfurians to the Sudanese government

1590 §7: Emphasizes that there can be no military solution to the conflict in Darfur

2005 1593 §1: Decides to refer the situation in Darfur since

1 July 2002 to the Prosecutor of the ICC

Res. which« referred » to r2p• 1755, 1828, 1870, 1881, 1919, 1935, • which reaffirms the provisions of the United Nations

World Summit Outcome document 2005

UN High-Level Mission report on HR Darfur is using R2P as a framework to analyze the failure of Sudan to protect its own citizens (§2)

The refusal of Sudanese government• §138 is applied: Sudanese government is unwilling or

unable to protect its citizens• §139 is also applied: at least crimes against humanity

(even genocide in the USA opinion and others)

Strategic interest of the permanent member of SC (Russia, China)

Not enough pression, cause there was a fear for peace process with South

Skepticism about humanitarian intervention

Military actions will worsen the situation UN immature in r2p concept, it was too

early + problem of whose responsibility (UN, AU, Sudan, League of Arab States?)

Selectivity was made part of r2p framework, cause r2p not intended to be applied in all imaginable crisis world-wide.

M. Sassoli: « R2p: Une obligation juridique ou une promesse

politique? »

Toujours le même problématique: est-ce que les résolutions de l’AG ont

une portée législative?