Journals / Alternatif Politika / 2017 / Cilt: 9 - Sayı: 3

A FEMINIST CRITIQUE OF THE RESPONSIBILITY TO PROTECT AFTER THE NORM’S FIRST DECADE

ONUNCU YILININ ARDINDAN “KORUMA SORUMLULUĞU”NUN KAVRAMSAL GELİŞİMİNE FEMİNİST BİR ELEŞTİRİ

Pages
385–408
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

In light of feminist critiques, the penultimate section of the article discusses what else is needed for further normative evolution of R2P.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The responsibility to protect (R2P) norm was adopted under the auspices of the United Nations (UN) twelve years ago.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Based on the assumption that R2P has not yet achieved the capacity to change states’ practice, in this article, the content and scope of R2P are analysed on grounds of feminist critiques of the norm, and issues for potential normative development are assessed.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:In light of feminist critiques, the penultimate section of the article discusses what else is needed for further normative evolution of R2P.
🔬Design:Review & Systematic Survey
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

The responsibility to protect (R2P) norm was adopted under the auspices of the United Nations (UN) twelve years ago. Based on the assumption that R2P has not yet achieved the capacity to change states’ practice, in this article, the content and scope of R2P are analysed on grounds of feminist critiques of the norm, and issues for potential normative development are assessed. From a gender perspective, it is known that “Women, Peace and Security” scholars and practitioners approach R2P with caution because of its close relation to the humanitarian intervention doctrine. Accordingly, in the first section, the normative transformation from a right to intervene into a responsibility to protect will be analysed in order to highlight the core differences. Following this, core points of feminist critiques of R2P in the current literature will be reviewed. In the third section, through a content analysis of the R2P specific reports vis-à-vis the understanding put forth in the UN Security Council Resolution 1325, it will be argued that R2P is not yet a sufficiently gender-aware approach, although it reflects the transformation from a militarist understanding towards a protective and preventive one. In light of feminist critiques, the penultimate section of the article discusses what else is needed for further normative evolution of R2P.

Özet

Birleşmiş Milletler (BM) çatısı altında ilk on yılını dolduran koruma sorumluluğu normunun mevcut haliyle devletlerin pratiğini değiştirecek kapasiteye henüz ulaşmadığı önermesinden yola çıkarak bu makalede koruma sorumluluğunun içeriği ve kapsamı feminist bir perspektiften eleştirilmekte ve üzerinde çalışılması gereken konular irdelenmektedir. Toplumsal cinsiyet yönünden koruma sorumluluğu “Kadınlar, Barış ve Güvenlik” (Women, Peace and Security) akademisyenleri ve pratisyenlerince insani müdahale doktrinine yakınlığı nedeniyle çekinceyle yaklaşılan bir norm olarak karşımıza çıkmaktadır. Bu nedenle, ilk bölümde insani müdahaleden koruma sorumluluğuna olan normatif dönüşüm ele alınacak ve iki kavram arasındaki temel farklılıklar irdelenecektir. İkinci bölümde, mevcut literatürde koruma sorumluluğu normuna dair feminist eleştirilerin temel noktaları irdelenecektir. Üçüncü bölümde ise militarist bir anlayıştan korumacı ve önleyici bir anlayışa yönelinmiş olmasına karşın koruma sorumluluğu normunda toplumsal cinsiyet odaklı bir dönüşümün yetersiz kaldığı,koruma sorumluluğu üzerine mevcut raporların feminist perspektiften içerik analizi yapılarak, BM Güvenlik Konseyi’nin 1325 sayılı kararında vurgulanan anlayışla kıyaslanarak ortaya konacaktır. Son olarak ikinci on yılına giren koruma sorumluluğunun normatif gelişimi için hangi konular çerçevesinde çalışmaların yapılabileceği feminist eleştiriler ışığında tartışılacaktır.

🔖

Cite This Article

ERCAN, M. P. G. (2017). A FEMINIST CRITIQUE OF THE RESPONSIBILITY TO PROTECT AFTER THE NORM’S FIRST DECADE. Alternatif Politika, Cilt: 9 - Sayı: 3, 385–408. https://ajindex.com/articles/147515

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (3)

  1. Bellamy, Alex J. (2010), “The Responsibility to Protect—Five Years On”, Ethics & International Affairs, 24 (2): 143-169.
  2. Bellamy, Alex J. (2012), “R2P—Dead or Alive?”, Brosig, Malte (Der.), The Responsibility to Protect—from Evasive to Reluctant Action? The Role of Global Middle Powers (Berlin: Hans Seidel Foundation). Bellamy, Alex J. (2015a), The Responsibility to Protect: A Defense (Oxford: Oxford University Press). Bellamy, Alex J. (2015b), The First Response: Peaceful Means in the Third Pillar of the Responsibility to Protect, The Stanley Foundation, http://stanleyfoundation.org/publications/pab/Bellamy3rdPillarPAB116.pdf (03.02.2016). Birleşmiş Milletler (BM) (2017), United Nations Office on Genocide Prevention and the Responsibility to Protect, Our Work, http://www.un.org/ en/genocideprevention/advancing-responsibility-to-protect.html (03.08.2017). Birleşmiş Milletler Genel Kurulu (BMGK) (2004), “A More Secure World: Our Shared Responsibility”, Report of the Secretary General’s Report High-level Panel on Threats, Challenges and Change, http://un.org/en/peacebuilding/pdf/historical/hlp_more_secure_world.pdf (08.06.2016). Birleşmiş Milletler Genel Kurulu (BMGK) (2005), “Report of the Secretary-General”, In Larger Freedom: Towards Development, Security and Human Rights for All, A/59/2005, 21 Mart, https://www.un.org/ruleoflaw/blog/document/in-larger-freedom-towards-development-security-and-human-rights-for-all-report-of-the-secretary-general/ (08.06.2016). Birleşmiş Milletler Genel Kurulu (BMGK) (2005), “Resolution Adopted by the General Assembly on 16 September 2005”, 60/1. 2005
  3. World Summit Outcome, A/Res/60/1, 24 Ekim, http://daccess-ods.un.org/access.nsf/Get?OpenAgent&DS=A/RES/60/1&Lang=E (05.11.2012). Birleşmiş Milletler Genel Kurulu (BMGK) (2009), “Report of the Secretary-General”, Implementing the Responsibility to Protect, A/63/677, 12 Ocak, http://www.un.org/en/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/63/677&referer=http://www.un.org/en/preventgenocide/adviser/responsibility.shtml&Lang=E (25.10.2015). Birleşmiş Milletler Genel Kurulu (BMGK) (2010), “Early Warning, Assessment and the Responsibility to Protect”, Report of the Secretary-General, A/64/864, 14 Temmuz, http://www.un.org/ga/search/view_doc.asp?symbol=A/64/864 (25.10.2015). Birleşmiş Milletler Genel Kurulu (BMGK) (2011), “The Role of Regional and Subregional Arrangements in Implementing the Responsibility to Protect”, Report of the Secretary-General, A/65/877–S/2011/393, 27 Haziran, http://www