Responsibility to Protect II: Challenges and Prospects

Tuesday, October 11, 2011, 10.00–11.30, Žofín Palace, Knight’s Hall

 

Moderator:

Howard Hensel, Professor of Politico-Military Affairs, Air War College, USA

Panel Discussion:

Sai Felicia Krishna-Hensel, Professor of Anthropology, Auburn, Montgomery, USA

George Andreopoulos, Professor of Political Science, The City University of New York, USA

Jared Genser, President, Freedom Now, USA

Pierre Lévy, Ambassador to the Czech Republic, France

 

 

Howard Hensel opened the second Responsibility to Protect (RtoP) panel by stating that, in comparison to the situation one hundred years ago, the protection of individual human rights is presently superior to state sovereignty. Sai Felicia Krishna-Hensel clarified that the RtoP concept is “not meant to address situations where human rights violations have been happening for a long time, but rather acute cases of war crimes, genocide, crimes against humanity and ethnic cleansing“.

 

This argument was supported by George Adreopulos, who asserted that if the concept of RtoP is to survive, specific criteria needs to be invented to distinguish between mass human rights violations and “ordinary” violations. Pierre Lévy was concerned with issues in implementing this concept. He recalled its three pillars: the responsibility of a state to protect its citizens; the support of the international community if a state fails to do so; and coercive action as a last resort.

 

Jared Genser distinguished RtoP from the concept of Humanitarian Intervention, claiming that ”RtoP not only responds to crimes committed, but attempts to prevent them from happening.“  In conclusion, the panelists agreed on the need to develop this concept through further practice.