The Responsibility to Protect and the United Nations’ Intervention in Regional Crises and Wars

Abstract

The debates surrounding the application of the Responsibility to Protect (R2P) Commitment, especially in Syria, have made it clear that the R2P is not yet fully understood. For if it were to be adequately understood, the debates would not have emerged or been as heated as it currently is. The aim of this paper was to examine the Responsibility to Protect Commitment. That is, it examined the origin, nature, advantages, and criticisms against the R2P. The study utilised the content analysis method and the data were generated through secondary sources. The realist theory was used as its theoretical foundation, and the paper argued that the origin of R2P was too casual to be a real commitment for the protection of human lives against the many threats that lurk the world over. Furthermore, the study posited that the current troubles with the implementation of the R2P is a product of the realist politics upon which the R2P was built, and it (R2P) is a normative prescription that has few legal backings. Conclusively, the study recommended that there should be a deliberate reconsideration of the R2P to not only clarify its goals but also clarify its legality and strengthen its applicability.