Currently viewing the tag: "responsibility to protect"

The field of genocide and mass atrocities studies has produced significant contributions to knowledge of where, when and why campaigns of large-scale, one-sided violence occur, but offers relatively few explicit examinations of the political, social and military dynamics of the de-escalation of violence. This simple question remains unexplored: how do mass atrocities end?

Continue Reading

The fact that civilians are suffering from violence in Syria is undisputed. Beyond that, it is hard to know what is fact, and what is constructed from a familiar narrative of a “responsibility to protect” civilians faced with the threat of atrocity.

The “R2P” narrative follows a familiar plotline: bad government continues offensives designed to [...]

Continue Reading

If you want to follow the debate sparked by recent writings from the WPF research collaborators on How Mass Atrocities End, Alex de Waal, Jens Meierhenrich and Bridget Conley-Zilkic, in the Fletcher Forum and New York Times/International Herald Tribune, look no further. “If it is not a norm, does it not threaten to serve as mere amplification of ethical rhetoric that obscures the real policy debates that are, in any case, conducted elsewhere with different vocabularies?”

Continue Reading

By Alex de Waal, Jens Meierhenrich, and Bridget Conley-Zilkic

This is an excerpt from the essay, published by the Fletcher Forum of World Affairs, Vol 35:3 (Winter 2011) and available in full on their website.

On October 20, 2011, the battered body of the deposed Libyan leader, Muammar Qaddafi, was paraded through the [...]

Continue Reading