Responsibility to Protect, Right to Intervene: Does the UN mantra have any resonance?

THIS EVENT IS HELD IN ASSOCIATION WITH THE NSW YOUNG LAWYERS' GROUP As massacres become a weekly news item from Syria - along with evidence of torture - a desperate cry that is often heard in Australia and the rest of the world is: Do Something! But what? Back in 2005, the United Nations initiated the Responsibility to Protect concept, or R2P, to use the diplomats' jargon. It's a set of principles, based on the concept that sovereignty is not a right, but a responsibility. One of the pillars of the UN declaration is that if a state fails to protect its citizens from mass atrocities - and peaceful measures have failed - the international community has the responsibility to intervene through coercive measures such as economic sanctions. Military intervention is considered the last resort. However the ultimate decision maker is the United Nations Security Council, which is often divided on action that might need to be taken to prevent atrocities. In the case of Syria, Russia has been a long-term ally of the Al Bashir dynasty, and, supported by China, believes dialogue is the only way to solve the problem. In the case of Zimbabwe, both the UN and Britain, the former colonial power, shied away from meaningful intervention because of strong opposition from neighboring South Africa. A further complication is that the Responsibility to protect, while a United Nations concept, has no validity in law. Additional background may be found as follows:- Crawford, E, The Treatment of Combatants and Insurgents under the Law of Armed Conflict, Oxford University Press: New York (2010) The Right to Protect, Foreign Affairs, by Gareth Evans and Mohamed Mahnoun. http://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/58437/gareth-evans-and-mohamed-sahnoun/the-responsibility-to-protect From Humanitarian Intervention to the Right to Protect, lecture by Gareth Evans. https://www.fh-muenster.de/humanitaere-hilfe/downloads/Evans_-_Responsibility_To_Protect.pdf Join us for a lively discussion on The Right to Protect; the Responsibility to Intervene - with Dr Robert Howard,of the University of Sydney, and Dr Emily Crawford, of the Sydney Centre for International Law. There will also be invited participation from the international committee of the NSW Young Lawyers' Group. At the University of Sydney, Dr Robert Howard researches aspects of the history of international relations in the twentieth century, with special reference to developments in international security. He is currently focusing on international security issues in the post-Cold War era and the role, at this time, of the United Nations. Other interests include international relations theory and developments in contemporary Australian politics and society. He is a former editor of the Current Affairs Bulletin. Dr Howard is a member of the council of the AIIA NSW. Dr Emily Crawford is a post-doctoral fellow and associate at the Sydney Centre for International Law (SCIL). Previously at the Law Faculty at the University of New South Wales, Emily's doctoral thesis on the disparate treatment of participants in armed conflicts was published by Oxford University Press in 2010. Emily has taught international law and international humanitarian law, and has delivered lectures both locally and overseas on international humanitarian law issues, including the training of military personnel on behalf of the Red Cross in Australia. A member of the International Law Association's Committee on Non-State Actors, as well as the NSW Red Cross IHL Committee, Emily's current research project is looking at major developments in the conduct of armed conflicts in the 21st century, such as cyber warfare and targeted assassinations, and the implications for both domestic and international law.