The Protection of Civilians and Responsibility to Protect Approaches

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Table of Contents

Introduction
Discussion
Conclusion
Works Cited

Introduction

It has been a recurrent phenomenon in human history that wars and clashes have caused tremendous harm to civilians. That is why there has been a stronger emphasis on protecting people during warfare. Among the strategies highlighted in this context are the Protection of Civilians and the Responsibility to Protect (R2P). Even though both of these approaches aim to shield civilians from danger during the armed struggle, they vary in terms of their scope, methodology, and objectives in responding to conflict.

Discussion

The “Protection of Civilians” strategy is designed to shield people from harm during militarized conflicts, preventing them from becoming casualties and denying adversaries the opportunity to use them as human shields. By contrast, the “Responsibility to Protect (R2P)” is a global pledge to stymie grave crimes (ISHIZUKA). It holds that the state is responsible for safeguarding its citizens from mass atrocities. However, if it is either unable or unwilling, the international community must step in, including through military action if necessary.

One of the significant distinctions between the Protection of Civilians and Responsibility to Protect is their scope. Whereas the Protection of Civilians is limited only to armed conflict scenarios, the Responsibility to Protect considers all occurrences of mass atrocities (ISHIZUKA). Moreover, the objectives for addressing conflict and mass atrocities differ. Protection of Civilians concentrates on protecting individuals in armed conflict, whereas Responsibility to Protect focuses on preventing mass atrocities and, when prevention fails, responding to them effectively.

To provide greater security for non-combatants, a mixture of strategies may be necessary. This combination could require bolstering the Protection of Civilians approach to address the core reasons for strife and make those responsible for severe human rights violations answerable. At the same time, the Responsibility to Protect initiative should be improved to ensure it is not applied as a justification for armed intervention and is only employed as an absolute necessity.

Conclusion

The Protection of Civilians and Responsibility to Protect approaches offer two distinct perspectives on protecting civilians during conflict. While both approaches have limitations, combining the two may offer a more comprehensive strategy for protecting civilians from harm. Ultimately, any approach to protecting civilians must address the root causes of conflict and seek to prevent mass atrocities from occurring in the first place.

Works Cited

ISHIZUKA, Katsumi. “The Protection of Civilians and The Responsibility to Protect in UN Peacekeeping Operations: Are the New Humanitarian Norms still Valid for Peacekeeping?.” Bulletin of Saitama Gakuen University. Faculty of Economics and Business 19 (2019): 101-112

Click Here To Order Now!

The Protection of Civilians and Responsibility to Protect Approaches

Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?

We have qualified writers to help you.

We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.

You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)