File #2301: "2018_Book_TheUNSecurityCouncilMembersRes.pdf"
Text
1|Preface|6
1|Contents|9
1|List of Abbreviations|18
1|Chapter 1 The Security Council and the Responsibility to Protect in the Age of New Wars|21
2|1.1 New Patterns of Warfare as a Challenge to the Traditional Normative System|23
2|1.2 Tools for the Security Council and Its Members to Combat Atrocity Crimes|28
3|1.2.1 The Competence and Toolbox of the Security Council in Addressing Atrocity Crimes|29
3|1.2.2 The Role of Member States in Security Council Deliberations and Decision-Making|36
2|1.3 The “Responsibility to Protect”: A Concept of Principled Decision-Making|39
3|1.3.1 The Notion of a “Responsibility to Protect”: The ICISS Concept and Its Evolution|40
3|1.3.2 The Security Council and Its Members in the R2P Concept|45
3|1.3.3 R2P and International Law|49
2|1.4 Judicial and Scholarly Opinions on Legal Duties to Protect and the Security Council|53
3|1.4.1 Duties of Prevention in the Jurisprudence of the ICJ|54
4|1.4.1.1 The Law Suit Announced by the Government of Bosnia and Herzegovina Against the United Kingdom for Its Conduct on the Security Council|55
4|1.4.1.2 The Duty to Prevent Genocide in the Law Suit against Serbia and Montenegro|56
4|1.4.1.3 The Duty to Ensure Compliance with the Fourth Geneva Convention in the Israeli Wall Opinion|60
3|1.4.2 Scholarly Debate on Legal Duties of Protection|61
2|1.5 Outlook: Two Pillars and a Common Foundation for Duties of Security Council Members to Prevent or Halt Atrocity Crimes|66
1|Chapter 2 Legal Theory and Methodology|68
2|2.1 The Processes of Legal Analysis and the Impact of Legal Theory|73
2|2.2 The Convergence of Inductive and Deductive Approaches in Theory and Practice|79
2|2.3 Sources and Canons of Interpretation|86
3|2.3.1 Treaty Interpretation|86
4|2.3.1.1 The Elements of Treaty Interpretation and Their Impact on the R2P Debate|88
4|2.3.1.2 Purposive Interpretation: Tensions Between Values, Effectiveness and Party Intentions|95
4|2.3.1.3 Evolutive Interpretation: Changing Understandings of a Treaty Provision|101
4|2.3.1.4 The Analysis of Subsequent Agreements and Practice|111
4|2.3.1.5 Conclusions on Treaty Interpretation|119
3|2.3.2 Customary International Law Analysis|121
4|2.3.2.1 The Concept of Customary Law and Its Application in the R2P Discourse|122
4|2.3.2.2 The Requirement of State Practice and Inductive or Deductive Reasoning|124
4|2.3.2.3 Conceptual Issues of Customary International Law Analysis|129
3|2.3.3 General Principles of Law|133
3|2.3.4 Jurisprudence and Doctrine|138
2|2.4 General Methodological Guidelines for the Discussion of R2P Duties|143
1|Chapter 3 The Security Council and International Law|147
2|3.1 The Security Council, Its Members, and the Rule of Law in Doctrine and Jurisprudence|147
3|3.1.1 The Idea of a Council “Legibus Solutus” and Its Legacy in the Scholarly Debate|149
3|3.1.2 The Member States’ Acts on the Council: From Legally Neutral to Discretionary|156
2|3.2 Practical or Pragmatic Arguments|162
3|3.2.1 The Security Council as a “Political Organ”|163
3|3.2.2 Absence of Review Mechanisms in Practice|165
3|3.2.3 Conclusion: The Need for a Normative Foundation for Exempting the Security Council’s Decision-Making Process from Legal Scrutiny|172
2|3.3 The Principle of State Sovereignty|172
2|3.4 Distinct Legal Personality and Responsibility of the United Nations|173
3|3.4.1 The ILC’s Approach to State Responsibility in connection with the Conduct of an International Organization|176
3|3.4.2 Judicial and Scholarly Support for State Responsibility in connection with Conduct within the Organs of an International Organization|180
3|3.4.3 State Responsibility in connection with the Conduct of International Organizations as a Matter of Interpretation and Conflicts of Law|181
2|3.5 The Constitutional Framework of the UN Charter|183
3|3.5.1 Priority of the UN Charter (Article 103 UN Charter)|183
3|3.5.2 The Procedural Framework for Security Council Decision-Making|187
3|3.5.3 The Presumed Fiduciary Relationship Between the Security Council Members and the UN Membership at Large|194
3|3.5.4 The Security Council’s Primary Responsibility for the Maintenance of International Peace and Security (Art. 24(1) and Chapter VII UN Charter)|197
3|3.5.5 Conclusions on the Compatibility of Substantive Duties for Security Council Members with the UN Charter|202
2|3.6 The Positive Dimension of Duties of Prevention and the Limits of Attribution in the Law of State Responsibility|202
2|3.7 Conclusion: Legally Constrained Discretion of the Security Council Members|204
1|Chapter 4 The International Law of Atrocity Crime Prevention|206
2|4.1 Genocide Convention|207
3|4.1.1 Judicial and Scholarly Opinion on a Duty to Prevent Genocide|208
4|4.1.1.1 The Jurisprudence of the International Court of Justice in the Bosnian Genocide Case|210
4|4.1.1.2 Scholarly Debate on the Conventional Duty to Prevent Genocide|214
4|4.1.1.3 The Interpretative Weight of the Judicial and Scholarly Pronouncements|219
3|4.1.2 Article VIII of the Genocide Convention|224
4|4.1.2.1 Judicial and Scholarly Opinion on Article VIII of the Genocide Convention|225
4|4.1.2.2 The Meaning of Article VIII in Light of the General Rule of Interpretation in Article 31(1) VCLT|227
4|4.1.2.3 The Drafting History of the Genocide Convention as a Supplementary Means of Interpretation|228
5|4.1.2.3.1 An Outline of the Drafting Process of the Genocide Convention|228
5|4.1.2.3.2 The Drafting History of Article VIII Genocide Convention|234
5|4.1.2.3.3 Outlook: Limited Potential to Evolve into a Norm Prescribing Preventive Action|242
4|4.1.2.4 Cold War Practice on Article VIII of the Genocide Convention|243
4|4.1.2.5 Interim Conclusion: Article VIII as a Largely Meaningless Norm on Allocation of Powers|244
3|4.1.3 Article I of the Genocide Convention|244
4|4.1.3.1 Judicial and Scholarly Opinions on Article I of the Genocide Convention|245
4|4.1.3.2 Grammatical Interpretation: The Tandem of Punishment and Prevention|247
4|4.1.3.3 Contextual Interpretation: Preventive Elements in the System of the Genocide Convention|249
4|4.1.3.4 The Purpose of the Genocide Convention: Liberating Mankind from the Scourge of Genocide|252
4|4.1.3.5 Preventive Mechanisms in the Drafting History of the Genocide Convention|254
5|4.1.3.5.1 Legal Implications of the Term “Undertake” in Light of the Travaux Préparatoires|255
5|4.1.3.5.2 The Evolving Nature of the Undertaking to Prevent and Punish: From Preambular to Operative|256
5|4.1.3.5.3 The Concept of Prevention Under the Convention: Prevention Through Punishment|261
5|4.1.3.5.4 Outlook: Article I of the Genocide Convention as a Gateway for Subsequent Developments|276
4|4.1.3.6 Cold War Practice on Article I of the Genocide Convention|278
5|4.1.3.6.1 East Pakistan (1971)|279
5|4.1.3.6.2 Uganda (1971–1979)|282
5|4.1.3.6.3 Cambodia (1975–1979)|283
5|4.1.3.6.4 Conclusions on the Application of Article I during the Cold War Period|285
3|4.1.4 Interim Conclusions: The Genocide Convention by the End of the Cold War|286
2|4.2 International Humanitarian Law: The 1949 Geneva Conventions|286
3|4.2.1 Article 1 of the 1949 Geneva Conventions|288
4|4.2.1.1 Judicial and Scholarly Opinions on the Undertaking “to ensure respect” for the Geneva Conventions|289
5|4.2.1.1.1 Scholarly Opinion: Prevalence of a Broad “state-compliance”-View|289
5|4.2.1.1.2 Dicta of the International Court of Justice on the Undertaking “to ensure respect”|292
5|4.2.1.1.3 The Interpretative Weight of the Judicial and Scholarly Pronouncements|294
4|4.2.1.2 Grammatical Interpretation|299
4|4.2.1.3 Contextual Interpretation|299
5|4.2.1.3.1 The Internal Context of Article 1 of the Geneva Conventions|299
5|4.2.1.3.2 The “Undertaking to Ensure Respect” in the Overall System of the Geneva Conventions|301
4|4.2.1.4 Teleological Interpretation|305
4|4.2.1.5 Historical Interpretation|306
5|4.2.1.5.1 The Genealogy of Article 1 and the Undertakings to Respect and Ensure Respect in All Circumstances|307
5|4.2.1.5.2 The Drafting History of Article 1 and the Function of the Undertaking to Ensure Respect|312
5|4.2.1.5.3 Interim Conclusion: Original Understandings of the Undertaking to Ensure Respect|318
4|4.2.1.6 Subsequent Agreements and Practice|319
5|4.2.1.6.1 Cold War Practice and Multilateral Debates on Article 1 of the 1949 Geneva Conventions|319
5|4.2.1.6.2 Interim Conclusions: Subsequent Understandings of the Undertaking to Ensure Respect|330
3|4.2.2 Article 89 of Protocol I of 1977|331
3|4.2.3 Interim Conclusions on the Duty to Ensure Respect for the Provisions of the 1949 Geneva Conventions|333
2|4.3 The Charter of the United Nations|333
3|4.3.1 Judicial and Scholarly Opinions on UN Charter Obligations of the Security Council Members|334
3|4.3.2 Duties of the Security Council Members Under Article 24 UN Charter?|336
3|4.3.3 The Good Faith Principle in Article 2(2) of the UN Charter|339
3|4.3.4 Interim Conclusions: UN Charter Obligations for Security Council Members in the Face of Atrocity Crimes|347
2|4.4 Duties to Prevent Atrocity Crimes under Customary International Law|347
3|4.4.1 Scholarly Opinion on Customary Duties to Prevent R2P Crimes|348
3|4.4.2 Customary Duty to Prevent Genocide|350
3|4.4.3 Customary Duty to Ensure Compliance with International Humanitarian Law|351
3|4.4.4 Customary Duty to Cooperate Under the Law of State Responsibility|355
3|4.4.5 Interim Conclusions: Customary Duties for the Prevention of R2P Crimes|357
2|4.5 Interim Conclusions and Outlook: The Need and Seeds for a Further Evolution of Duties to Prevent Atrocity Crimes in International Law Prior to the Emergence of R2P|357
1|Chapter 5 Multilateral Debates on R2P and the Protection of Civilians, and Their Impact on General and Treaty Law|359
2|5.1 Thematic Debates of the Security Council and the General Assembly concerning the Protection of Civilians in Armed Conflict (POC) and the Responsibility to Protect (R2P)|359
2|5.2 Emergence of the Responsibility to Protect as a Norm of General International Law?|365
3|5.2.1 The UN World Summit 2005: Agreement on the Responsibility to Protect Concept|366
4|5.2.1.1 Wording, Context and Drafting History of Paragraph 139 of the World Summit Outcome Document|367
4|5.2.1.2 The Lack of a Guiding Framework for Decisions of the Security Council|372
4|5.2.1.3 Conclusions on the Legal Quality of the Collective R2P After the 2005 World Summit|374
3|5.2.2 POC Debates and R2P Dialogues: Views on the Legal Nature of the R2P Concept|375
4|5.2.2.1 Consolidation of the R2P Framework as Agreed at the 2005 World Summit|376
4|5.2.2.2 State Opinion Regarding the Nature of R2P: Political, Moral or Legal Framework|383
3|5.2.3 Interim Conclusions on the Status of R2P Under General International Law|386
2|5.3 Evolutive Interpretation of the Conventional Duty to Prevent Genocide?|387
2|5.4 Evolutive Interpretation of the Undertaking to Ensure Respect for the Geneva Conventions?|391
2|5.5 Evolutive Interpretation of the UN Charter Framework for the Prevention of Mass Atrocities?|397
3|5.5.1 The UN Charter as a Legal Framework for the Prevention of Mass Atrocity Crimes|398
3|5.5.2 The Principles and Purposes of the United Nations: Between Imperatives and Limits|400
3|5.5.3 The Responsibility of the Security Council for International Peace and Security|402
3|5.5.4 Interim Conclusions on the Legal Framework of the UN Charter for the Prevention of Atrocity Crimes|404
2|5.6 General Observations on the Interplay Between Law and Politics in the Work of the Security Council for the Prevention of Atrocity Crimes|404
3|5.6.1 Moral and Political Guidance Rather than Legal Duties for Security Council Members|406
3|5.6.2 Criteria and Guidelines: Limits Rather than Imperative for Action|407
3|5.6.3 Institutional Reforms: The Security Council’s Composition and Possible Guidance from the General Assembly|408
3|5.6.4 Veto Right: Appeals for Voluntary Abstention rather than Legal Boundaries|411
2|5.7 Conclusions: The Legal Dimension of the Discourse on Atrocity Crime Prevention|416
1|Chapter 6 Security Council Practice on Atrocity Crime Prevention Since the End of the Cold War|418
2|6.1 A Short Period of Security Council Activism Following the End of the Cold War (1991–1993)|420
3|6.1.1 Northern Iraq (1991)|420
3|6.1.2 Somalia (1991–1995)|422
3|6.1.3 Bosnia and Herzegovina (1991–1995)|426
4|6.1.3.1 Arms Embargo and Sanctions Regime|429
4|6.1.3.2 Expansion of the UN Protection Force Mandate in Bosnia and Herzegovina|430
4|6.1.3.3 Creation of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia|431
4|6.1.3.4 Declaration of “Safe Areas” and Enforcement Mandate for UNPROFOR|432
3|6.1.4 Assessment: Trends, Patterns and Legal Concepts|436
4|6.1.4.1 Trends and Patterns: Growing Attention to the Protection of Civilian Populations|436
4|6.1.4.2 UN Charter: Massive Human Rights Violations as a Threat to Peace and Security|437
4|6.1.4.3 Genocide Convention and Geneva Conventions: Limited Impact and Traditional Readings|439
5|6.1.4.3.1 Genocide Convention|440
5|6.1.4.3.2 Geneva Conventions|441
4|6.1.4.4 Limits to the International Commitment to Prevent Atrocity Crimes|442
2|6.2 Security Council Failure in the Face of Genocides, Crimes Against Humanity, War Crimes and Ethnic Cleansing (1993–1999)|444
3|6.2.1 Somalia (1995–2000)|445
3|6.2.2 Burundi (1993–2000)|446
3|6.2.3 Rwanda (1994)|449
3|6.2.4 Kosovo (1998–1999)|454
3|6.2.5 Assessment: Trends, Patterns and Legal Concepts|457
4|6.2.5.1 Trends and Patterns: Limits to the International Commitment to Prevent Mass Atrocities|457
4|6.2.5.2 Impact on the Interpretation of Legal Concepts|458
5|6.2.5.2.1 Genocide Convention: Between Criminal Law and a Broader Duty to Prevent|458
5|6.2.5.2.2 Geneva Conventions and UN Charter|465
4|6.2.5.3 Turning Point: Debates on Lessons to be Learned from Rwanda, Srebrenica and Kosovo|466
2|6.3 Increasing and Intensified Security Council Commitment to the Prevention of Mass Atrocities (Since 1999)|466
3|6.3.1 East Timor (1999)|467
3|6.3.2 Burundi (2000–2006)|469
3|6.3.3 Somalia (Since 2000)|470
4|6.3.3.1 Strengthening of the Arms Embargo|473
4|6.3.3.2 Protection and Military Support for Transitional Federal Institutions|473
4|6.3.3.3 Targeted Sanctions and Arms Embargo|474
4|6.3.3.4 Developments following the End of the Transitional Period in September 2012|475
3|6.3.4 Eastern DRC|476
4|6.3.4.1 Robust Military Intervention, Including for the Protection of Civilians|478
4|6.3.4.2 Arms Embargo and Targeted Sanctions Regime|481
4|6.3.4.3 Recent Trends in Security Council Action on the DRC|482
3|6.3.5 Sudan (Southern Sudan)|482
3|6.3.6 Sudan (Darfur)|486
4|6.3.6.1 Measures Short of the Deployment of UN Forces|488
4|6.3.6.2 Authorization of a Joint AU/UN Peacekeeping Force|490
4|6.3.6.3 Peace Negotiations and Continued Violence Following the Deployment of UNAMID|492
3|6.3.7 Côte d’Ivoire (2010–2011)|493
3|6.3.8 Libyan Arab Jamahiriya (2011)|497
3|6.3.9 Syrian Arab Republic (Since 2011)|500
4|6.3.9.1 First Phase: Inactivity and Largely Failed Consultations of the Security Council|501
4|6.3.9.2 Second Phase: Increasing Divisions Amongst the Security Council Members and Between the Security Council and the General Assembly|504
4|6.3.9.3 Third Phase: Security Council Involvement Through a UN Supervision Mission|506
4|6.3.9.4 Fourth Phase: Return of the Security Council to the Role of an Observer|508
4|6.3.9.5 Fifth Phase: Diplomatic Activities and Security Council Resolution on Chemical Weapons|509
4|6.3.9.6 Sixth Phase: Geneva II Negotiations and Humanitarian Access|511
3|6.3.10 Assessment: Trends, Patterns and Legal Concepts|511
4|6.3.10.1 Trends: The Evolving Practice on the Prevention of Mass Atrocity Crimes and Its Limits|512
5|6.3.10.1.1 Patterns of Security Council Involvement: Growing Attention and Action|512
5|6.3.10.1.2 Persisting Limits to Security Council Involvement Through Forceful Intervention|513
5|6.3.10.1.3 Negative Practice on Darfur and Syria?|515
4|6.3.10.2 Existing Legal Regimes: The Prevalence of Traditional Readings|518
5|6.3.10.2.1 Genocide Convention: A Fading Call for Preventive Action|518
5|6.3.10.2.2 International Humanitarian Law and the Geneva Conventions|525
5|6.3.10.2.3 UN Charter: Limits and Responsibilities for the Prevention of Mass Atrocities|528
4|6.3.10.3 The Emergence of New Frameworks: Protection of Civilians and R2P|530
5|6.3.10.3.1 The Protection of Civilians (POC)|530
5|6.3.10.3.2 The Responsibility to Protect (R2P)|532
2|6.4 Conclusion: Prevention of R2P Crimes as an Increasingly Central Matter of Politics|535
1|Chapter 7 Conclusions|539
1|Bibliography|544
1|Contents|9
1|List of Abbreviations|18
1|Chapter 1 The Security Council and the Responsibility to Protect in the Age of New Wars|21
2|1.1 New Patterns of Warfare as a Challenge to the Traditional Normative System|23
2|1.2 Tools for the Security Council and Its Members to Combat Atrocity Crimes|28
3|1.2.1 The Competence and Toolbox of the Security Council in Addressing Atrocity Crimes|29
3|1.2.2 The Role of Member States in Security Council Deliberations and Decision-Making|36
2|1.3 The “Responsibility to Protect”: A Concept of Principled Decision-Making|39
3|1.3.1 The Notion of a “Responsibility to Protect”: The ICISS Concept and Its Evolution|40
3|1.3.2 The Security Council and Its Members in the R2P Concept|45
3|1.3.3 R2P and International Law|49
2|1.4 Judicial and Scholarly Opinions on Legal Duties to Protect and the Security Council|53
3|1.4.1 Duties of Prevention in the Jurisprudence of the ICJ|54
4|1.4.1.1 The Law Suit Announced by the Government of Bosnia and Herzegovina Against the United Kingdom for Its Conduct on the Security Council|55
4|1.4.1.2 The Duty to Prevent Genocide in the Law Suit against Serbia and Montenegro|56
4|1.4.1.3 The Duty to Ensure Compliance with the Fourth Geneva Convention in the Israeli Wall Opinion|60
3|1.4.2 Scholarly Debate on Legal Duties of Protection|61
2|1.5 Outlook: Two Pillars and a Common Foundation for Duties of Security Council Members to Prevent or Halt Atrocity Crimes|66
1|Chapter 2 Legal Theory and Methodology|68
2|2.1 The Processes of Legal Analysis and the Impact of Legal Theory|73
2|2.2 The Convergence of Inductive and Deductive Approaches in Theory and Practice|79
2|2.3 Sources and Canons of Interpretation|86
3|2.3.1 Treaty Interpretation|86
4|2.3.1.1 The Elements of Treaty Interpretation and Their Impact on the R2P Debate|88
4|2.3.1.2 Purposive Interpretation: Tensions Between Values, Effectiveness and Party Intentions|95
4|2.3.1.3 Evolutive Interpretation: Changing Understandings of a Treaty Provision|101
4|2.3.1.4 The Analysis of Subsequent Agreements and Practice|111
4|2.3.1.5 Conclusions on Treaty Interpretation|119
3|2.3.2 Customary International Law Analysis|121
4|2.3.2.1 The Concept of Customary Law and Its Application in the R2P Discourse|122
4|2.3.2.2 The Requirement of State Practice and Inductive or Deductive Reasoning|124
4|2.3.2.3 Conceptual Issues of Customary International Law Analysis|129
3|2.3.3 General Principles of Law|133
3|2.3.4 Jurisprudence and Doctrine|138
2|2.4 General Methodological Guidelines for the Discussion of R2P Duties|143
1|Chapter 3 The Security Council and International Law|147
2|3.1 The Security Council, Its Members, and the Rule of Law in Doctrine and Jurisprudence|147
3|3.1.1 The Idea of a Council “Legibus Solutus” and Its Legacy in the Scholarly Debate|149
3|3.1.2 The Member States’ Acts on the Council: From Legally Neutral to Discretionary|156
2|3.2 Practical or Pragmatic Arguments|162
3|3.2.1 The Security Council as a “Political Organ”|163
3|3.2.2 Absence of Review Mechanisms in Practice|165
3|3.2.3 Conclusion: The Need for a Normative Foundation for Exempting the Security Council’s Decision-Making Process from Legal Scrutiny|172
2|3.3 The Principle of State Sovereignty|172
2|3.4 Distinct Legal Personality and Responsibility of the United Nations|173
3|3.4.1 The ILC’s Approach to State Responsibility in connection with the Conduct of an International Organization|176
3|3.4.2 Judicial and Scholarly Support for State Responsibility in connection with Conduct within the Organs of an International Organization|180
3|3.4.3 State Responsibility in connection with the Conduct of International Organizations as a Matter of Interpretation and Conflicts of Law|181
2|3.5 The Constitutional Framework of the UN Charter|183
3|3.5.1 Priority of the UN Charter (Article 103 UN Charter)|183
3|3.5.2 The Procedural Framework for Security Council Decision-Making|187
3|3.5.3 The Presumed Fiduciary Relationship Between the Security Council Members and the UN Membership at Large|194
3|3.5.4 The Security Council’s Primary Responsibility for the Maintenance of International Peace and Security (Art. 24(1) and Chapter VII UN Charter)|197
3|3.5.5 Conclusions on the Compatibility of Substantive Duties for Security Council Members with the UN Charter|202
2|3.6 The Positive Dimension of Duties of Prevention and the Limits of Attribution in the Law of State Responsibility|202
2|3.7 Conclusion: Legally Constrained Discretion of the Security Council Members|204
1|Chapter 4 The International Law of Atrocity Crime Prevention|206
2|4.1 Genocide Convention|207
3|4.1.1 Judicial and Scholarly Opinion on a Duty to Prevent Genocide|208
4|4.1.1.1 The Jurisprudence of the International Court of Justice in the Bosnian Genocide Case|210
4|4.1.1.2 Scholarly Debate on the Conventional Duty to Prevent Genocide|214
4|4.1.1.3 The Interpretative Weight of the Judicial and Scholarly Pronouncements|219
3|4.1.2 Article VIII of the Genocide Convention|224
4|4.1.2.1 Judicial and Scholarly Opinion on Article VIII of the Genocide Convention|225
4|4.1.2.2 The Meaning of Article VIII in Light of the General Rule of Interpretation in Article 31(1) VCLT|227
4|4.1.2.3 The Drafting History of the Genocide Convention as a Supplementary Means of Interpretation|228
5|4.1.2.3.1 An Outline of the Drafting Process of the Genocide Convention|228
5|4.1.2.3.2 The Drafting History of Article VIII Genocide Convention|234
5|4.1.2.3.3 Outlook: Limited Potential to Evolve into a Norm Prescribing Preventive Action|242
4|4.1.2.4 Cold War Practice on Article VIII of the Genocide Convention|243
4|4.1.2.5 Interim Conclusion: Article VIII as a Largely Meaningless Norm on Allocation of Powers|244
3|4.1.3 Article I of the Genocide Convention|244
4|4.1.3.1 Judicial and Scholarly Opinions on Article I of the Genocide Convention|245
4|4.1.3.2 Grammatical Interpretation: The Tandem of Punishment and Prevention|247
4|4.1.3.3 Contextual Interpretation: Preventive Elements in the System of the Genocide Convention|249
4|4.1.3.4 The Purpose of the Genocide Convention: Liberating Mankind from the Scourge of Genocide|252
4|4.1.3.5 Preventive Mechanisms in the Drafting History of the Genocide Convention|254
5|4.1.3.5.1 Legal Implications of the Term “Undertake” in Light of the Travaux Préparatoires|255
5|4.1.3.5.2 The Evolving Nature of the Undertaking to Prevent and Punish: From Preambular to Operative|256
5|4.1.3.5.3 The Concept of Prevention Under the Convention: Prevention Through Punishment|261
5|4.1.3.5.4 Outlook: Article I of the Genocide Convention as a Gateway for Subsequent Developments|276
4|4.1.3.6 Cold War Practice on Article I of the Genocide Convention|278
5|4.1.3.6.1 East Pakistan (1971)|279
5|4.1.3.6.2 Uganda (1971–1979)|282
5|4.1.3.6.3 Cambodia (1975–1979)|283
5|4.1.3.6.4 Conclusions on the Application of Article I during the Cold War Period|285
3|4.1.4 Interim Conclusions: The Genocide Convention by the End of the Cold War|286
2|4.2 International Humanitarian Law: The 1949 Geneva Conventions|286
3|4.2.1 Article 1 of the 1949 Geneva Conventions|288
4|4.2.1.1 Judicial and Scholarly Opinions on the Undertaking “to ensure respect” for the Geneva Conventions|289
5|4.2.1.1.1 Scholarly Opinion: Prevalence of a Broad “state-compliance”-View|289
5|4.2.1.1.2 Dicta of the International Court of Justice on the Undertaking “to ensure respect”|292
5|4.2.1.1.3 The Interpretative Weight of the Judicial and Scholarly Pronouncements|294
4|4.2.1.2 Grammatical Interpretation|299
4|4.2.1.3 Contextual Interpretation|299
5|4.2.1.3.1 The Internal Context of Article 1 of the Geneva Conventions|299
5|4.2.1.3.2 The “Undertaking to Ensure Respect” in the Overall System of the Geneva Conventions|301
4|4.2.1.4 Teleological Interpretation|305
4|4.2.1.5 Historical Interpretation|306
5|4.2.1.5.1 The Genealogy of Article 1 and the Undertakings to Respect and Ensure Respect in All Circumstances|307
5|4.2.1.5.2 The Drafting History of Article 1 and the Function of the Undertaking to Ensure Respect|312
5|4.2.1.5.3 Interim Conclusion: Original Understandings of the Undertaking to Ensure Respect|318
4|4.2.1.6 Subsequent Agreements and Practice|319
5|4.2.1.6.1 Cold War Practice and Multilateral Debates on Article 1 of the 1949 Geneva Conventions|319
5|4.2.1.6.2 Interim Conclusions: Subsequent Understandings of the Undertaking to Ensure Respect|330
3|4.2.2 Article 89 of Protocol I of 1977|331
3|4.2.3 Interim Conclusions on the Duty to Ensure Respect for the Provisions of the 1949 Geneva Conventions|333
2|4.3 The Charter of the United Nations|333
3|4.3.1 Judicial and Scholarly Opinions on UN Charter Obligations of the Security Council Members|334
3|4.3.2 Duties of the Security Council Members Under Article 24 UN Charter?|336
3|4.3.3 The Good Faith Principle in Article 2(2) of the UN Charter|339
3|4.3.4 Interim Conclusions: UN Charter Obligations for Security Council Members in the Face of Atrocity Crimes|347
2|4.4 Duties to Prevent Atrocity Crimes under Customary International Law|347
3|4.4.1 Scholarly Opinion on Customary Duties to Prevent R2P Crimes|348
3|4.4.2 Customary Duty to Prevent Genocide|350
3|4.4.3 Customary Duty to Ensure Compliance with International Humanitarian Law|351
3|4.4.4 Customary Duty to Cooperate Under the Law of State Responsibility|355
3|4.4.5 Interim Conclusions: Customary Duties for the Prevention of R2P Crimes|357
2|4.5 Interim Conclusions and Outlook: The Need and Seeds for a Further Evolution of Duties to Prevent Atrocity Crimes in International Law Prior to the Emergence of R2P|357
1|Chapter 5 Multilateral Debates on R2P and the Protection of Civilians, and Their Impact on General and Treaty Law|359
2|5.1 Thematic Debates of the Security Council and the General Assembly concerning the Protection of Civilians in Armed Conflict (POC) and the Responsibility to Protect (R2P)|359
2|5.2 Emergence of the Responsibility to Protect as a Norm of General International Law?|365
3|5.2.1 The UN World Summit 2005: Agreement on the Responsibility to Protect Concept|366
4|5.2.1.1 Wording, Context and Drafting History of Paragraph 139 of the World Summit Outcome Document|367
4|5.2.1.2 The Lack of a Guiding Framework for Decisions of the Security Council|372
4|5.2.1.3 Conclusions on the Legal Quality of the Collective R2P After the 2005 World Summit|374
3|5.2.2 POC Debates and R2P Dialogues: Views on the Legal Nature of the R2P Concept|375
4|5.2.2.1 Consolidation of the R2P Framework as Agreed at the 2005 World Summit|376
4|5.2.2.2 State Opinion Regarding the Nature of R2P: Political, Moral or Legal Framework|383
3|5.2.3 Interim Conclusions on the Status of R2P Under General International Law|386
2|5.3 Evolutive Interpretation of the Conventional Duty to Prevent Genocide?|387
2|5.4 Evolutive Interpretation of the Undertaking to Ensure Respect for the Geneva Conventions?|391
2|5.5 Evolutive Interpretation of the UN Charter Framework for the Prevention of Mass Atrocities?|397
3|5.5.1 The UN Charter as a Legal Framework for the Prevention of Mass Atrocity Crimes|398
3|5.5.2 The Principles and Purposes of the United Nations: Between Imperatives and Limits|400
3|5.5.3 The Responsibility of the Security Council for International Peace and Security|402
3|5.5.4 Interim Conclusions on the Legal Framework of the UN Charter for the Prevention of Atrocity Crimes|404
2|5.6 General Observations on the Interplay Between Law and Politics in the Work of the Security Council for the Prevention of Atrocity Crimes|404
3|5.6.1 Moral and Political Guidance Rather than Legal Duties for Security Council Members|406
3|5.6.2 Criteria and Guidelines: Limits Rather than Imperative for Action|407
3|5.6.3 Institutional Reforms: The Security Council’s Composition and Possible Guidance from the General Assembly|408
3|5.6.4 Veto Right: Appeals for Voluntary Abstention rather than Legal Boundaries|411
2|5.7 Conclusions: The Legal Dimension of the Discourse on Atrocity Crime Prevention|416
1|Chapter 6 Security Council Practice on Atrocity Crime Prevention Since the End of the Cold War|418
2|6.1 A Short Period of Security Council Activism Following the End of the Cold War (1991–1993)|420
3|6.1.1 Northern Iraq (1991)|420
3|6.1.2 Somalia (1991–1995)|422
3|6.1.3 Bosnia and Herzegovina (1991–1995)|426
4|6.1.3.1 Arms Embargo and Sanctions Regime|429
4|6.1.3.2 Expansion of the UN Protection Force Mandate in Bosnia and Herzegovina|430
4|6.1.3.3 Creation of the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia|431
4|6.1.3.4 Declaration of “Safe Areas” and Enforcement Mandate for UNPROFOR|432
3|6.1.4 Assessment: Trends, Patterns and Legal Concepts|436
4|6.1.4.1 Trends and Patterns: Growing Attention to the Protection of Civilian Populations|436
4|6.1.4.2 UN Charter: Massive Human Rights Violations as a Threat to Peace and Security|437
4|6.1.4.3 Genocide Convention and Geneva Conventions: Limited Impact and Traditional Readings|439
5|6.1.4.3.1 Genocide Convention|440
5|6.1.4.3.2 Geneva Conventions|441
4|6.1.4.4 Limits to the International Commitment to Prevent Atrocity Crimes|442
2|6.2 Security Council Failure in the Face of Genocides, Crimes Against Humanity, War Crimes and Ethnic Cleansing (1993–1999)|444
3|6.2.1 Somalia (1995–2000)|445
3|6.2.2 Burundi (1993–2000)|446
3|6.2.3 Rwanda (1994)|449
3|6.2.4 Kosovo (1998–1999)|454
3|6.2.5 Assessment: Trends, Patterns and Legal Concepts|457
4|6.2.5.1 Trends and Patterns: Limits to the International Commitment to Prevent Mass Atrocities|457
4|6.2.5.2 Impact on the Interpretation of Legal Concepts|458
5|6.2.5.2.1 Genocide Convention: Between Criminal Law and a Broader Duty to Prevent|458
5|6.2.5.2.2 Geneva Conventions and UN Charter|465
4|6.2.5.3 Turning Point: Debates on Lessons to be Learned from Rwanda, Srebrenica and Kosovo|466
2|6.3 Increasing and Intensified Security Council Commitment to the Prevention of Mass Atrocities (Since 1999)|466
3|6.3.1 East Timor (1999)|467
3|6.3.2 Burundi (2000–2006)|469
3|6.3.3 Somalia (Since 2000)|470
4|6.3.3.1 Strengthening of the Arms Embargo|473
4|6.3.3.2 Protection and Military Support for Transitional Federal Institutions|473
4|6.3.3.3 Targeted Sanctions and Arms Embargo|474
4|6.3.3.4 Developments following the End of the Transitional Period in September 2012|475
3|6.3.4 Eastern DRC|476
4|6.3.4.1 Robust Military Intervention, Including for the Protection of Civilians|478
4|6.3.4.2 Arms Embargo and Targeted Sanctions Regime|481
4|6.3.4.3 Recent Trends in Security Council Action on the DRC|482
3|6.3.5 Sudan (Southern Sudan)|482
3|6.3.6 Sudan (Darfur)|486
4|6.3.6.1 Measures Short of the Deployment of UN Forces|488
4|6.3.6.2 Authorization of a Joint AU/UN Peacekeeping Force|490
4|6.3.6.3 Peace Negotiations and Continued Violence Following the Deployment of UNAMID|492
3|6.3.7 Côte d’Ivoire (2010–2011)|493
3|6.3.8 Libyan Arab Jamahiriya (2011)|497
3|6.3.9 Syrian Arab Republic (Since 2011)|500
4|6.3.9.1 First Phase: Inactivity and Largely Failed Consultations of the Security Council|501
4|6.3.9.2 Second Phase: Increasing Divisions Amongst the Security Council Members and Between the Security Council and the General Assembly|504
4|6.3.9.3 Third Phase: Security Council Involvement Through a UN Supervision Mission|506
4|6.3.9.4 Fourth Phase: Return of the Security Council to the Role of an Observer|508
4|6.3.9.5 Fifth Phase: Diplomatic Activities and Security Council Resolution on Chemical Weapons|509
4|6.3.9.6 Sixth Phase: Geneva II Negotiations and Humanitarian Access|511
3|6.3.10 Assessment: Trends, Patterns and Legal Concepts|511
4|6.3.10.1 Trends: The Evolving Practice on the Prevention of Mass Atrocity Crimes and Its Limits|512
5|6.3.10.1.1 Patterns of Security Council Involvement: Growing Attention and Action|512
5|6.3.10.1.2 Persisting Limits to Security Council Involvement Through Forceful Intervention|513
5|6.3.10.1.3 Negative Practice on Darfur and Syria?|515
4|6.3.10.2 Existing Legal Regimes: The Prevalence of Traditional Readings|518
5|6.3.10.2.1 Genocide Convention: A Fading Call for Preventive Action|518
5|6.3.10.2.2 International Humanitarian Law and the Geneva Conventions|525
5|6.3.10.2.3 UN Charter: Limits and Responsibilities for the Prevention of Mass Atrocities|528
4|6.3.10.3 The Emergence of New Frameworks: Protection of Civilians and R2P|530
5|6.3.10.3.1 The Protection of Civilians (POC)|530
5|6.3.10.3.2 The Responsibility to Protect (R2P)|532
2|6.4 Conclusion: Prevention of R2P Crimes as an Increasingly Central Matter of Politics|535
1|Chapter 7 Conclusions|539
1|Bibliography|544