Talk:Responsibility to protect

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
WikiProject International relations (Rated C-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject International relations, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of International relations on Wikipedia.
If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.


Hi, I'm just pointing out that under the section "Double standards in the implementation" the author of the paragraph is in discussion with the referred author. Encyclopedic text should refrain from such direct critique of the referred author. A suitable alternative would be to refer another author whose ideas oppose the first author. But I believe that Wikipedia articles should be clear of opinions of its authors. (talk) 09:11, 31 October 2014 (UTC)

Hi, I hope the changes are okay with everyone - the section on whether or not RtoP gave false hope seemed to be reminiscent of the section on military intervention. I also put the call to action from Kofi Annan back in the conception section because I think this root cause is very important. Thanks! (Ras543 14:25, 5 May 2010) —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk)

Hi there,

I just edited the first paragraph of your article so it would link nicely to my article on humanitarian intervention and human security (its just part of a university assignment and the article is on human security). Hope you find the changes ok.

Thanks (Pangaea42 15:37, 7 May 2006 (UTC))

Is there any way to capitalize the "p" in the title so that it reads "Responsibility to Protect"? The way it looks now (uppercase R and lower case p) looks unprofessional. ([[ (talk) 16:04, 9 July 2013 (UTC)]] 12:02, 9 July 2013 (EST))

Instances Biased, uncited, unjustified and Original Research[edit]

The section "Instances" seems to be biased against the U.S., has no citations, no justifications and may simply be "original research" by the writer. I will edit it to remove the items I think are unjustifiable, and add some tags to the section. (no, I am not an American) Sailfish2 (talk) 21:59, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

I don't think it's biased against the US but it is certainly an anachronistic and unnecessary section. I think its purpose it to boost the case for R2P in places like Syria, and by extension any civil war anywhere. Wikipedia can't be poltical like that so I've been bold and removed it. Akafd76 07:10, 14 July 2013 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Akafd76 (talkcontribs)

Supporters - human security proponents[edit]

I have added 'human security proponents' as supporters of R2P. R2P very much follows the human security approach not only in terms of the goal of protecting people from violence and insecurity, but also in the desire to provide a workable solution within the current international framework. For this reason, I felt it was worthwhile to identify human security proponents as strong supporters of r2p and briefly explain why. Timschocker (talk) 15:25, 23 April 2008 (UTC)


In what sense is this doctrine Novel, it's exactly the same stuff spouted by Blair and Clinton to justify bombing Yugoslavia.Domminico (talk) 22:04, 21 May 2008 (UTC)

Although I would not characterize the thwarting of a genocide / ethnic cleansing event "spouting" justifications, it is correct that the intervention in Yugoslavia is an application of this doctrine. Some earlier examples include the aborted mission in Somalia. It is a novel development, in a historical context, that foreign countries would as a group intervene to protect the citizenry of a government that is unable or unwilling to protect its own people from violence, or that is causing that violence. Those interventions predated the formulation of R2P as a doctrine, but they can be seen as antecedents. The proponents hope that by establishing it as an international norm it could be discussed and applied sooner so as to prevent situations like the genocides in Rwanda or Darfur, although their model was Pol Pot's killing fields in Cambodia. A widely criticized application is the US intervention in Iraq which was justified to some degree as protective of the Iraqi people. If you are more cynical about such things, what is novel is that intervention is justified this way or at least that these justifications are given credence. Perhaps an antecedent counterexample would be the old communist bloc rhetoric that justified invasions as "liberation" of the people. The NPR source I added describes what is novel about it. Wikidemon (talk) 16:27, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Although I don't like Domminico's tone, it seems factually incorrect to state that "Responsibility to Protect (R2P) is a *recently* developed concept." Noam Chomsky gave a speech on the subject before the UN July 23 2009. (to listen to Chomsky's part about R2P, skip to roughly the 50-55+ minute section)

I think we ought to change the wording to reflect the fact that the concept of R2P is anything but new, although the wording might be novel. Spartan2600 (talk) 12:13, 28 July 2009 (UTC)

Criticism section[edit]

The section reads like an essay. It contains no references and makes bold collective statements. For example take the first two sentences "One of the main concerns surround RtoP is that it infringes upon national sovereignty." who are those who have voiced concerns who is it that says it is the main concern? "This concern is generally considered as being misplaced" who considers it misplaced? The construction uses weasel words and without citations to support it may be in breach of the original research policy. -- PBS (talk) 13:07, 26 December 2010 (UTC)

Bias in introduction[edit]

I have removed the following paragraphs from the introduction, as they are biased and are not sourced:

In order to implement RtoP, States and regional organizations need to have the necessary resources to prevent and halt mass atrocities, i.e. early warning mechanisms, stand-by forces in problem areas, mediation mechanisms, etc. These resources and the necessary capacity building must come from the international community, which has a historic pattern of remaining uninvolved.
Full implementation of RtoP is also hindered by the perception that it is being used by western countries to serve their interests when justifying of violations of sovereignty of other countries in developing world, using international institutions west controls.

-- (talk) 02:58, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

Failure to Protect[edit]

There should be a separate Wikipedia article on Failure to Protect. The consequences of Failure to Protect can be severe. For example, in Japan, voters are calling for the a new Prime Minister after he failed to protect them from radiation. There will be no tolerance for the Failure to Protect civilians from harm perpetrated by officials.

Failure to Protect is a major subject of its own and should have its own Wikipedia article to enforce the clarity of the subject. —Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 12:07, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

An explanation for sections below[edit]

I have included all this citation info as a help to any editors seeking to improve this article. I realize that if the discussion becomes active, this material will easily get in the way. When that happens, all these citations can be moved into a sandbox format, if that is the desire of other editors. Thanks. DonaldRichardSands (talk) 04:18, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

Citations that may be helpful to editors of this article[edit]

The purpose of this section is to provide useful citations in the development of this article. drs (talk) 22:19, 7 January 2012 (UTC)


Contributors ( + indicates work is included in this ebook preview)
Adam Branch, San Diego State University
+David Chandler, University of Westminster
+Noam Chomsky, Massachusetts Institute of Technology (retired)
+Philip Cunliffe, University of Kent, Canterbury
Aidan Hehir, University of Westminster
+Tara McCormack, Leicester University
Mahmood Mamdani, Columbia University
Mary Ellen O'Connell, Kroc Institute, University of Notre Dame


The Economist

Global Responsibility to Protect

International Affairs

Pugwash Newsletter



International Institute for Justice and Development

The Stanley Foundation

Encyclopedia of Mass Violence

World Federation of United Nations Associations

  • "The UN and R2P". World Federation of United Nations Associations. Retrieved 2012-January-8.  Check date values in: |accessdate= (help)

University of Ottawa

  • Robinson, Paul (November 1, 2011). "Protection Racket". Centre for International Policy Studies Blog. University of Ottawa. Retrieved 2012-January-10.  Check date values in: |accessdate= (help)

Human Rights Watch

United Nations

  • "Responsibility to Protect". Lessons from Rwanda, the United Nations and the Prevention of Genocide. The United Nations. n.d. Retrieved 2012- January 10.  Check date values in: |accessdate= (help)

Macleans Magazine

Parliamentarians Network for Conflict Prevention

Web of Democracy

Oxfam International

The Vatican and Pope Benedict XVI

  • Pope Benedict XVI (Friday, April 18, 2008). "Address of His Holiness Benedict XVI,". Apostolic Journey to the United States of America and Visit to the United Nations Organizational Headquarters, Meeting with the Members of the General Assembly of the United Nations Organization. L'Osservatore Romano. Weekly Edition in English no. 17, pp. 12,13. Libreria Editrice Vaticana. Retrieved 2012-01-15.  Check date values in: |date= (help)

Humanitarian Intervention[edit]

The purpose of this section is to develop an acquaintance of the secondary sources which address the questions of intervention. drs (talk) 00:08, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

Who should intervene?[edit]

Pattison, James (2010). Humanitarian intervention and the responsibility to protect: who should intervene? (Google eBook). New York, NY: Oxford University Press Inc. ISBN 978-0-19-956104-9. 

When is intervention justified?[edit]

Thought Leaders for R2P[edit]

In this section, let's examine the ideas of R2P's thought leaders and the critics. drs (talk) 06:14, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

An outline for the article[edit]

I. Introduction, the lead

II. History

1. Mass killings before Rwanda
2. Rwanda
3. Kofi Annan starts of the dialog, 1998
4. Lloyd Axworthy's Canadian Initiative
5. The United Nations and R2P.

III. The United Nations mandate

IV. Implementation

1. Success (Countries, Activitist organizations)
2. Failure (Security Council sanctions and vetoes)
3. Confusion (mixed expectations and responses)

V. Critical responses

1. Political criticism
2. Scholarly criticism


See Also

External Links


Sovereignty as Responsibility[edit]

The concept of Sovereignty as Responsibility and the traditional concept of Sovereignty are held in tension. China vetoed the Security Council's draft resolution regarding Burma because what was happening in Burma did not threaten the peace of the region. Even though China had voted in favor of the 2005 World Summit, it considers internal humanitarian concerns to be beyond the mandate of the international community. Has China spoken to this?

Francis Deng and Roberta Cohen.

Sovereigns have responsibilities to their own people.

"The intellectual and political origins of the R2P lay in the concept of 'sovereignty as responsibility', developed by the UN Special Representative on Internally Displaced Persons, Francis Deng, and by Roberta Cohen, a Senior Fellow at the Brookings Institution." p. 2

At the 2005 UN World Summit, world leaders endorsed the international principle of Responsibility to Protect (R2P), acknowledging that they had a responsibility to protect their citizens from genocide and mass atrocities and pledging to act in cases where governments manifestly failed in their responsibility. This marked a significant turning point in attitudes towards the protection of citizens worldwide.

This important new book charts the emergence of this principle, from its origins in a doctrine of sovereignty as responsibility, through debates about the legitimacy of humanitarian intervention and the findings of a prominent international commission, and finally through the long and hard negotiations that preceded the 2005 commitment. It explores how world leaders came to acknowledge that sovereign rights entailed fundamental responsibilities and what that acknowledgment actually means. The book goes on to analyze in detail the ways in which R2P can contribute to the global effort to end genocide and mass atrocities. Focusing on the prevention of these crimes and the improvement of the world's reaction to them, the book explores the question of how to build sustainable peace in their aftermath. Alex J. Bellamy argues that although 2005 marked an important watershed, much more work is needed to defend R2P from those who would walk away from their commitments and - in the words of UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon - to translate the principle 'from words into deeds'.

This fascinating book will appeal to students and scholars of international relations, international affairs, human rights and humanitarian emergencies, as well as anyone concerned about the protection of civilians on a global scale.

  • Bickerton, Christopher J.; Cunliffe, Philip; Gourevitch, Alexander, editors (2007). Politics without sovereignty: a critique of contemporary international relations (Google eBook). Abingdon, Oxon, UK: Taylor and Francis. p. 208. ISBN 13:978-0-415-51806-5 Check |isbn= value (help). 
    Written by leading scholars, this book challenges the recent trend in international relations scholarship - the common antipathy to sovereignty.The classical doctrine of sovereignty is widely seen as totalitarian, producing external aggression and internal repression. Political leaders and opinion-makers throughout the world claim that the sovereign state is a barrier to efficient global governance and the protection of human rights.Two central claims are advanced in this book. First, that the sovereign state is being undermined not by the pressures of globalization but by a diminished sense of political possibility. Second, the book demonstrates that those who deny the relevance of sovereignty have failed to offer superior alternatives to the sovereign state. Sovereignty remains the best institution to establish clear lines of political authority and accountability, preserving the idea that people shape collectively their own destiny. The authors claim that this positive idea of sovereignty as self-determination remains integral to politics both at the domestic and international levels.This key text will be of great interest to students and scholars of political science, international relations, security studies, international law, development and European studies.

The Just War Tradition and the Responsiblity to Protect[edit]

The "just war" tradition has found its way into standard operating principles, including most recently the responsibility to protect. (Barnett p. 20)

The role of the Security Council[edit] cases where forceful intervention does become necessary, the Security Council—the body charged with authorising the use of force under international law—must be able to rise to the challenge.

In the case of Burma, the United States and Britain presented a draft resolution citing UNSC1674 as a reason to intervene.

Earlier, NATO became involved in Kosovo because the Security Council could not agree to intervene.

China and Russia have vetoed resolutions.

Has the United States vetoed resolutions?

History of Troubled regions[edit]

  • Rwanda
  • East Timor
  • Kosovo
  • Kenya
  • Sierra Leone
  • Sudan
  • Angola
  • Afghanistan

The prevention of Genocide[edit]

The Carnegie Commission on Preventing Deadly Conflict[edit]

This section needs more formatting.,or.r_gc.r_pw.,cf.osb&fp=c32cc78ff422a91c&biw=853&bih=361

1948 Convention of the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide[edit]

The essay by Steven Haines explans in quite readable text the story of R2P. DonaldRichardSands (talk) 03:38, 12 January 2012 (UTC)

Title Never again?: the United States and the prevention and punishment of genocide since the Holocaust Author Peter Ronayne Edition illustrated Publisher Rowman & Littlefield, 2001 ISBN 0742509222, 9780742509221 Length 223 pages

Never again?: the United States and the prevention and punishment of genocide since the Holocaust (Google eBook) Peter Ronayne 0 Reviews Rowman & Littlefield, 2001 - 223 pages Where will the first genocide of the 21st century occur? As the cases in Never Again? indicate, it's not a question of whether but when and where. The 20th century is notorious for several genocides beyond the infamous Nazi eradication of six million Jews, and this book covers three important cases in specific detail: Cambodia, Bosnia, and Rwanda. Beyond that, Never Again? explores the uneasy U.S. relationship to the U.N. Genocide Convention and posits an analysis of U.S. response to genocide past and forthcoming: nonintervention followed by post-genocide justice. Visit our website for sample chapters!More »

p. 36

R2P compared to the Right to Intervene doctrine[edit]

The Google summary indicates that Evans does a comparison of the Right to Intervene with R2P.

Chronology of humanitarian responsibility[edit]

1948, Convention of the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide

1991, Somalia, all means necessary

1994, Rwanda

1994, Haiti, Security Council authorized

1995, Bosnia, the Dayton Accords

1999, Kosovo, NATO responds, the Security Council stalled by Russia's veto.

2001, February, ICISS's third round table meeting in London. Rather than right to intervene or an obligation to intervene, Gareth Evans, Mohamed Sahnoun, and Michael Ignatieff that it might be helpful to think in terms of a "responsibility to protect".

2002, Sudan, Darfur

2007, Zimbabwe economy

Burma, deliberate prevention of foreign aid reaching disaster victims

The responsibility to protect phrase introduced by Evans, Sahnoun and Ignatieff[edit]

In February 2001, at the third round table meeting of the International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty (ICISS) in London. Gareth Evans, Mohamed Sahnoun and Michael Ignatieff suggested the concept of a "responsibility to protect." This avoided the "right to intervene" or "obligation to intervene" doctrines but kept a degree of duty to act.[1]

  1. ^ Haines, Steven; Kassimeris, George, ed. (2010), "Chapter 18, Humanitarian Intervention: Genocide, Crimes against Humanity and the Use of Force", The Ashgate research companion to modern warfare, Burlington, VT: Ashgate Publishing Ltd, pp. 307–329, ISBN 978-0-7546-7410-8 

Economic Sanctions[edit]

Gareth Evans:

My own initial experience of the use of economic sanctions-- against apartheid South Africa--was wholly positive. Not in the case of trade sanctions, which had been applied, and avoided, for years without discernible effect, but financial sanctions--involving the cooperation of governments and banks in denying or limiting credit to the South African government and local was these sanctions, more than any other form of external pressure, that had ultimately forced South Africa to the negotiating table.

Evans, Gareth J. (2008). The responsibility to protect: ending mass atrocity crimes once and for all (Google eBook). Washington D.C.: Brookings Institution Press. p. 349. ISBN 978-0-8157-2504-6.  p. 113

Security Council actions and vetoes[edit]



On Friday, July 11th, (2008) the UN Security Council failed to pass a resolution that would have imposed sanctions against Zimbabwean President Robert Mugabe in response to the illegitimate election and the violence it has caused within the country of Zimbabwe. The resolution was vetoed by 2 of the 15 member state's permanent members China and Russia.

Security Council Meeting:

Preventive diplomacy[edit]

Preventive diplomacy

U.N. Security Council Ministerial on Small Arms[edit]

Speech by Lloyd Axworthy, Canadian Minister of Foreign Affairs, to U.N. Security Council Ministerial on Small Arms, Sept. 24, 1999

Pugwash Conferences on Science and World Affairs[edit]

Pugwash Conferences on Science and World Affairs

The 53rd Pugwash Conference

Standby High Readiness Brigade (SHIRBRIG).[edit]

Standby High Readiness Brigade (SHIRBRIG) Pugwash (2003), p. 18

Misusing the Responsibility to Protect[edit]

The best way to discourage States or groups of States from misusing the responsibility to protect for inappropriate purposes would be to develop fully the United Nations strategy, standards, processes, tools and practices for the responsibility to protect.

United Nations A/63/677 General Assembly Distr.: General 12 January 2009 Original: English 09-20610 (E) 280109

  • 0920610*

Sixty-third session Agenda items 44 and 107 Integrated and coordinated implementation of and follow-up to the outcomes of the major United Nations conferences and summits in the economic, social and related fields


Crisis in Burma

Adelman, Howard, ed (2008). Protracted displacement in Asia: no place to call home. Law, ethics and governance. Burlington, VT: Ashgate Publishing Ltd. p. 243. ISBN 978-0-7546-7238-8. 

If the military junta in Burma continues to be intractable in persecuting ethnic minorities in Burma, the international community could consider the potential of UN Security Council Resolution 1674 (UNSC 1674), a reaffirmation of the 'Responsibility to Protect' (R2P) populations who suffer from extreme human rights abuses and lack of protection from their own governments (UNSC 2006). R2P asserts that, 'when a state is unwilling or unable to protect its citizens from genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity, it is the responsibility of the international community to not only react, but to prevent conflict and rebuild the afflicted region' (' "The Responsibility to Protect", International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty', December 2011. In January 2007, a draft resolution was presented to the UN Security Council by the United Kingdom and the United States evoking UNSC1674 in relation to Burma. Amongst other things, it called for the Burmese govenment to cease all attacks on ethnic minorities, including rape, and to offer unhindered access to humanitarian organizations. China and Russia voted against the resolution, China stating that Burma did not pose a threat to international peace and security in the region. However, this was contested by members of the Association of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN) who expressed dissatisfaction with the slow paceof reforms in Burma (Thompson 2007).

It must be noted however, that the threshold for engagement for R2P is that a state is 'unwilling or unable' to protects its citizens from crimes against humanity. However, the current regime appears to deny that the Rohingyas are citizens of Burma... pp. 100-101


Stea presents what could be thought of as a sympathetic understanding of the Russian stance regarding Syria and its internal troubles. Syria's crisis illustrates the complexities of R2P. There are two types of resistance in Syria: one armed and the other not armed. It may be useful to view R2P military intervention like police action. Ideal police action involves restraint in the use of deadly force. Even people with weapons should be treated with respect though not indulgence. Are there authors sayings these things?

This news item examines a United States led proposed draft regarding the crisis in Syria. It provides an example of R2P in action. This is not to suggest that the motives of the USA are above reproach on this, but that they seem to be using R2P staging to address the problems in Syria. Russia, as an ally of Syria, opposes the draft. Reasons are cited in this news item.


Seddon, Mark (January 13, 2012). "After Libya, the UN Must Adopt a More Reasonable Approach to Post Conflict Resolutions". The Huffington Post. Retrieved 2012-1-14.  Check date values in: |accessdate= (help)

Seddon examines Ban Ki-moon's UN leadership, "essentially a 'man of the people'."

"Beleaguered despots throughout the Middle East and beyond now know that the United Nations will not be silent when the human rights of their citizens are abused. And Ban has not been slow in defending the record of the United Nations in Libya, particularly Resolution 1973. Had the UN Security Council, under Ban's leadership, not moved to institute that resolution and 'Responsibility to Protect', Colonel Gadaffi would have likely proceeded with his threat to dismantle Libya's second city, Benghazi, brick by brick.

"For the record UN Security Council Resolution 1973 passed with 10 votes in favour, with five abstentions (Brazil, China, Germany, India, Russian Federation). It authorised member States to take all necessary measures to protect civilians under threat of attack in the country, including Benghazi, while excluding a foreign occupation force of any form on any part of Libyan territory. It also requested those countries taking military action individually or collectively "to immediately inform the Secretary-General of such measures". Furthermore the resolution requested "that Member States should inform the Secretary-General immediately of the measures they take" and UN teams 'will assess conditions and advise on humanitarian needs and threats in all areas affected by the conflict.' "

Seddon examines the post intervention circumstance in Libya. This too is part of the R2P process.

"And this is where the UN's post conflict dilemma lies; how does it determine the likely long term effect of Resolution 1973? How much thought and planning has gone into cleaning up after the conflict has taken place? And what can the UN do to encourage the international community, and specifically members of the UN Security Council to destroy unexploded mines and bombs and collect the guns and ammunition before they end up in another giant arms bazaar? "

Kenya, 2007, 2008[edit]

Badescu (2010:140)

Post-election violence in Kenya.

Following the disputed December 2007 presidential elections in Kenya, the country's several dozen ethnic groups took to the streets, and the subsequent demonstrations and escalating violence that resulted in 1,300 deaths and 600,000 displace civilians threatened to slide toward carnage and ethnic cleansing. Collective efforts in early 2008 brought this to a halt, and showed the beneficial effects of rapic and consolidated international action...

Violence erupted immediately after the release of the flawed elction results and, in response, the Kikuyu-dominant army and police used exessive force.

Desmond Tutu and Francis Deng, the UN special Adviser on the Prevention of Genocide were the first to make references to R2P in relation to the 2007 post-election violence in Kenya (UN News 2008c). The UN Secretary-General reminded the Kenyans of their legal and moral responsibility to protect the lives of their citizens, regardless of ethnic, racial, or religious origin, and to prevent future violence, but did not repeat this reference to R2P in his susequent statemtns. Early January 2007, the Chairman of the AI and President of Ghana, John Kufuor, asked former UN Secretary-General Kofi Annon to dediate as the leader of a small panel which also included former Tanzanian president Benjamin Mkapa and former first lady of Mozambique, Graca Machel. After initially rejecting mediation by either the UN or the AU, Kibaki and the PNU ultimately accepted the mediation team, which arrived in Keny on 22 January 2008. As a result of "the 41-day mediation marathon," a political power-sharing prposal for Keny's first coalition government saw the creation of the post of prime minister with some executive authority for Odinga (Weiss 2010:23). He was sworn in on 17 April 2008. The arrangement brokered by Annan was essential in bring the parties to the table and stabilizing Kenya...

Evans p. 51,+%22responsibility+to+protect%22&hl=en&sa=X&ei=6zcST4_MHZOQ0QHYuMSLDw&ved=0CD0Q6AEwAg#v=onepage&q=kenya%2C%20%22responsibility%20to%20protect%22&f=false


African Union

Peace and Security Council
African Standby Force


Second Liberian civil war

p. 342



UN expert on genocide prevention travels to West Africa

16 March 2010 – Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon’s Special Adviser on the prevention of genocide is travelling to West Africa to identify how national and sub-regional bodies can help prevent the scourge. Due to poor weather, Francis Deng’s visit was delayed and he is now scheduled to arrive in the region tomorrow, it was announced today.

He will stop in Guinea, Nigeria and Ghana, where he will discuss his mandate with government officials, UN officials on the ground and representatives from the Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS)....

2012, January

SUBSIDY: We can remove subsidy without fuel price hike – Ezeife

"The government must realise that it is its responsibility to protect the lives of our people."


2012, January

Ban, Ashiru meet as Nigerians protest in U.S.

Posted by Information Nigeria in Home » Uncategorized on January 12, 2012

"Discussions between the two leaders also touched on the situation in Somalia, including the need to continue to support the African Union peacekeeping mission in Somalia (AMISOM),"

The Westphalian norm[edit]

Is China More Westphalian Than the West?

The following appeared in the November/December 2011 issue (Vol. 9, No. 6) of Foreign Affairs.


The penalty for an Indonesian official failing to protect a European civilian from harm is death. — Preceding unsigned comment added by (talk) 06:06, 25 April 2013 (UTC)


>> Africans closer to forming intervention force(Lihaas (talk) 18:11, 7 December 2013 (UTC)).