The Responsibility to Protect Act (R2P) is the international communities responsibility to protect countries that cannot protect themselves. Prior to this, there is often a debate stemming back to the Treaty of Westphalia, as to if you should intervene somewhere and defy that sovereign nations rights, or ignore those rights to help the people that country is harming. The R2P narrows it down to say that you may only intervene in situation of genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing, or crimes against humanity. If a sovereign nation is trying to wipe out a whole selection of people, or any other atrocities, it should cancel out their rights as a sovereign nation. Now, the R2P sounds great but just like any other initiative, there will be a few issues. Where is it worth intervening? Is it worth risking the lives of our own troops?
In Myanmar, the Burmese junta, the Tatadawm and other armed groups under GOVERNMENT control are committing terrible human rights violations against ethnic as well as religious minorities including murder, torture, rape, forced labor and sexual abuse. The EU and the UN intervened in Myanmar, but why didn't others gather a stronger front? Under the R2P, the international community expressed concern over the safety of populations in Burma. Many countries denounced the junta and called for an end to government-perpetrated human rights abuses. The US, France, and the UK tightened economic sanctions on the regime and Japan threatened to cut aid to the country. This sovereignty vs saving lives issue has many loop holes, but overall, internationally, protection of lives is far more important that respecting the countries committing these heinous crimes.
No comments:
Post a Comment