Case Study: Conflicts and World Geography

Introduction

The responsibility to protect tend to be complicated since it is an issue that requires the international law to be in a position of protecting the international community to assist in preventing mass atrocity crimes that could occur within the boundaries of a state that is considered as being sovereign.

Is your time best spent reading someone else’s essay? Get a 100% original essay FROM A CERTIFIED WRITER!

Save 25%

Question 1 of the Case Study

The theoretical approach that best describes the argument made by the authors is the theoretical conflict approach by Karl Marx. According to the theoretical conflict approach, conflicts and tensions tend to arise when status, resources, and power become distributed in a manner that is uneven within different groups in the society, and the conflicts tend to be used as a driving factor for social change. Marxian perspective tends to provide a radical alternative to functionalist view regarding the nature of social stratification. In this case, power can be considered to be control of politics and the various institutions that a society is made up of as well as ones social status relative to others.

Through this approach, those in power tend to create a system which portrays unequal social order for their benefit. In this case, for example, the International community despite trying to end the crisis in Syria through use of diplomatic sanctions they have not been in a position to do so since there are other parties as well as the state who do not want the crisis to come to an end for their own selfish needs. According to the UN Humanitarian Rights Council, the crisis that is being experienced in Syria is as a result of the state policy of deliberate attitudes towards its citizens or civilians. The more powerful stats than Syria are abusing their power for self-interest to fulfill their political interests. In this case, Russia is one of those states that are likely to be grounded in their strategic self-interest as a justification for intervening so that they can be in a better position of serving their political interests. In Syria, there is an apparent divide in Aleppo. Two forces in Syria are fighting against each other that is the eastern part of the city that is mainly controlled by the rebel forces and the western part of the city which is controlled by the Syrian regime forces alongside Kurdish forces.

In Syria, the Security Council veto System is oppressing its citizens. The Security Council which is in power fails to act to protect its citizens. According to C. Wright Mills, the policies of the power elite tend to result in increased conflict escalation of the conflict, production of weapons of mass destruction and the possibility of eliminating the human race. This can be related to the case that has been experienced in Syria whereby more than 75,000 civilians have died, and about 1,000,000 refugees have gone into the states that are neighboring as a result of the ongoing the conflict. This is evident in the case since according to the authors the military is using the weapons to destroy their civilians rather than protecting them.

From a theoretical approach of the conflict theory political power, especially the power of any state irrespective of the structure tend to be the key determinant of the activities that the state involves itself in. The power structures tend to rely upon the obedience of the subjects to the ruler's orders, and therefore if the concerned subjects fail to obey the orders, in turn, the leaders lack the power to act. In Syria, for example, the Security Council has been unable to pass three strongly-worded resolutions which will act as an authorization towards peaceful measures that will help end the conflict.

Societies tend to be defined by the level of inequality that results into conflict rather than which results in consensus and order. A conflict that is based on inequality can be overcome through a fundamental transformation of the relations that exist in the society and can assist in the production of new social relations. The authors, in this case, are advocating for a situation that the force of the military is limited to low-intensity options with the aim of protecting their populations. The authors are also advocating for the use of a military force that is of low-intensity which should be authorized by an authority that is legitimate as a means of transforming the relations that exist in the society.

According to the authors of this case before subjecting force on the civilians like the case in Syria whereby their militants are killing the civilians, peaceful options must be exhausted to help in stopping or preventing of atrocity crimes. They also advocate for the establishment of a prima facie case whereby information is gathered by a neutral third party such as an international court which does not have any self-interest. The authors of this case also advocate for a situation whereby the Security Council are not in a position to act. The Security Council should not be in a position to act effectively as they could be a barrier towards achieving resolutions that aim at compelling the state in question to stop or prevent mass atrocity and work towards fulfilling its obligation which is to protect its people or populations from mass atrocity crimes. The setting of the high diplomatic threshold will assist in ensuring that the primary role that has been bestowed upon the Security Council in authorizing the use of force is not abused, but rather it is respected.

Question Two of the Case Study

Basing on the three main components of Neo-Realism it is impossible for the main concept of Responsibility to Protect to be applied in Syria to protect against humanitarian violations. The responsibility to protect is a political commitment which is global that all the United Nations member states endorsed during the World Summit in 2005 with the aim of preventing war crimes, ethnic cleansing, genocide and crimes against humanity. According to the authors of this case the R2P respects, the importance that international law attaches to the sovereignty of a state while providing a framework which help in regulating the manner in which force is used to protect its populations and in rare cases is the international community allowed by R2P to use force. The Responsibility to Protect has turned out to be a high moral aspiration that has been floundered on the complex realities that are being experienced in today's warfare. Since the U.S led in the invasion of Iraq, it showed the incapability of the West to be in a position of coming up appropriate strategies that can assist in protecting the civilians of a given State. It is impossible to implement the concept of Responsibility to Protect in Syria since the Syrian civil war was never just about Syria but rather from the beginning, regional and international powers intervened in the conflict and supported different parties.

In Syria, it is hard to implement the concepts of Responsibility to Protect also because of the many parties involved in the crisis for their own self-interest needs and therefore it has resulted in a situation whereby states do not trust each other for fear of survival. The institutions that are charged with the implementation of Responsibility to Protect have failed to carry out their duties. The Syrian government has failed to stop the killing of its people as well as the Syrian Security Council has acted as a barrier towards ensuring that the conflict resolutions are not effectively implemented despite the responsibility to protect being entrusted on them by the members of the United Nations.

In this case, the Syrian Security Council failed to implement three main resolutions that were put forward in ending of conflict due to Russian and Chinese opposition whereby the first resolution threatened sanctions if the Syrian government failed to end the violence that they were enforcing against their civilians. The second resolution that the council failed to enforce was a resolution that called on Assad to leave office and supported the Arab League's peace plan. The Security Council failed to implement the third resolution that was put forward in July 2012 that was sponsored by France, Germany, and the U.S. which threatened sanctions if the Syrian government failed to remove heavy weapons from the Syrian regions that were highly populated within ten days. For example, in this case, Syria's war erupted in 2011 which was after an uprising that was popular against the Assad family's which was more than a four-decade rule which was influenced by the Arab Spring revolts across the Middle East.

States tend to ensure that they are as strong as possible while also ensuring that their rivals are weaker which is evident in this case whereby Russia and China have acted on the Security Council resulting into its ineffectiveness and therefore undermining an effective response. The UN Security Council has failed to condemn the behavior of the Assad regime for killing civilians and therefore they have to ensure that they remain as strong as possible and their rivals remain weaker. They also fear that if they intervene other states such as Russia and Iran who do not want the conflict to end for their personal gains would attack them since all states fear for the survival and therefore do not trust other states. For example when the Syrian dictator appeared to be losing the battle when the rebels destroyed most of his tanks with anti-tank missiles that had been provided by the U.S allies in the Persian Gulf, Russia turned the tide of war so as to help Assad with an air campaign that targets the U.S forces that supported the opposition and not the actual terrorists that the campaign discussed.

As each state continually feels insecure they tend to have the desire to gain capabilities. Capabilities refer to instrumentals for states to ensure their survival. While striving to attain security from any potential attack the states tend to be driven towards acquiring more capabilities so as to help escape the impact of the capabilities of others and in turn, the other States tend to feel more insecure and requires them to prepare for the worst.

It is not possible to implement the concepts of Responsibility to Protect in Syria since foreign powers are prolonging the conflict. Because of the need to survive all states seek power to ensure that they can defend attacks by an aggressor and therefore both Assad's forces and Syrian rebels have powerful allies who provide them with assistance and weapons. Russia and Iran are determined to help Assad whereby Russia has begun to launch airstrikes from a base that is in Western Iran. Iran has also provided funding and organized Shiite militias from Pakistan, Afghanistan, Lebanon, and Iraq to add to the ranks fighting alongside Assad.

In this case, due to lack of trust of other States, it becomes difficult for the U.S to develop a strategy that is consistent that will help support both the rebels and as well as fight the Islamic extremists. This makes it impossible to apply the concept of Responsibility to Protect in Syria to protect against humanitarian violations since the U.S do not trust that other states will not attack back considering there are too many players in the case of Syria if they decide to implement a strategy that favors the rebels or Islamic extremists.

Question Three of the Case Study

Responsibility to Protect should become a new law at the international level that supersedes the concept of non-intervention in the internal affairs of all states. The international level helps in regulating the use of force by states per the Charter of the United Nations. All states across the world including those of great powers are required to justify their behavior according to the accepted norms as well as according to legal rules. The UN charter which is the international framework through which n...