Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Challenges in Implementing the Responsibility to Protect: The Security Council Veto and the Need for a Common Ethical Approach

  • Published:
The Journal of Ethics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In 2005 the member states of the United Nations recognized a “responsibility to protect” (“R2P”) victims of mass atrocities such as genocide, war crimes, and crimes against humanity. They acknowledged a special role for the U.N. Security Council in responding to these atrocities, including potentially authorizing military action using its extensive powers under Chapter VII of the U.N. Charter. However, the Council has very rarely been able to agree on appropriate action, and the five permanent Council members (“P5”), most notably China and Russia, have often vetoed or threatened to veto Council resolutions authorizing R2P action. The article argues that the veto poses a major impediment to the Council acting on its R2P responsibilities, and that to resolve it, the P5, and all U.N. member states, need to agree on a common ethical approach. The article proposes such an approach based on ethical concepts that are widely endorsed by states, especially in the U.N. Charter and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, and explores its implications for legal and ethical controversies relating to the role of the Council, its obligations under R2P, and proposed reforms of the veto.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. I have elaborated on this approach and more thoroughly defended it in my previous books and articles. See, e.g., Lepard 2002.

  2. I have explored support for this principle in religious texts and traditions in further detail in my previous books. See, e.g., Lepard 2002: 45–47.

  3. All quotes from the Qur’an are from the translation in Arberry (1955).

  4. For further examples of passages expressing such support, and more detailed analysis of them, see Lepard 2002: 89-92.

References

  • ‘Abdu’l-Bahá. 1971. Paris talks: addresses given by ‘Abdu’l-Bahá in Paris in 1911–1912. New Delhi: Bahá’í Publishing Trust.

    Google Scholar 

  • ‘Abdu’l-Bahá. 1981. Some answered questions, trans. Laura Clifford Barney. Wilmette, Ill.: Bahá’í Publishing Trust.

  • Arberry, A.J., trans. 1955. The Koran interpreted. New York: Simon and Schuster.

  • Bagnoli, Carla. 2006. Humanitarian intervention as a perfect duty: a Kantian argument. In Humanitarian intervention: nomos XLVII, ed. Terry Nardin and Melissa S. Williams, 117–140. New York: New York University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bahá’u’lláh. 1976. Gleanings from the writings of Bahá’u’lláh, trans. Shoghi Effendi. Wilmette, Ill.: Bahá’í Publishing Trust, 2d rev. ed.

  • Bahá’u’lláh. 1978. Tablets of Bahá’u’lláh revealed after the Kitáb-i-Aqdas, trans. Habib Taherzadeh. Haifa: Bahá’í World Centre.

  • Beitz, Charles R. 1979. Political theory and international relations. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beitz, Charles R. 1994. Cosmopolitan liberalism and the states system. In Political restructuring in Europe: ethical perspectives, ed. Chris Brown, 123–136. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Beitz, Charles R. 2009. The idea of human rights. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Besson, Samantha. 2015. The bearers of human rights’ duties and responsibilities for human rights: a quiet (r)evolution? Social Philosophy and Policy 32: 244–268.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Blatter, Ariela, and Paul D. Williams. 2011. The responsibility not to veto. Global Responsibility to Protect 3 (3): 301–322.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Brooks, E. Bruce, and A. Taeko Brooks, trans. 1998. The original analects: sayings of Confucius and his successors. New York: Columbia University Press.

  • Buchanan, Allen. 2013. The heart of human rights. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Conze, Edward, trans. 1959. Buddhist scriptures. London: Penguin Books.

  • Dworkin, Ronald. 1986. Law’s empire. Cambridge: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Evans, Gareth. 2008. The responsibility to protect: ending mass atrocity crimes once and for all. Washington, D.C.: Brookings Institution Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Evans, Gareth. 2020. The dream and the reality. Global Responsibility to Protect 12: 363–365.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Follesdal, Andreas. 2005. Human rights and relativism. In Real world justice: grounds, principles, human rights, and social institutions, ed. Andreas Follesdal and Thomas Pogge, 265–283. Dordrecht: Springer.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Frost, Mervyn. 1996. Ethics in international relations: a constitutive theory. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Hashmi, Sohail H. 1993. Is there an Islamic ethic of humanitarian intervention? Ethics and International Affairs 7: 55–73.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Himes, Kenneth R. 1993. Just war, pacifism and humanitarian intervention. America 169 (4): 10–15.

    Google Scholar 

  • International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty (“ICISS”). 2001. The responsibility to protect: report of the international commission on intervention and state sovereignty. Ottawa: International Development Research Centre.

  • Küng, Hans, and Karl-Josef. Kuschel, eds. 1993. A global ethic: the declaration of the parliament of the world’s religions. New York: Continuum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lepard, Brian D. 2002. Rethinking humanitarian intervention: a fresh legal approach based on fundamental ethical principles in international law and world religions. University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lepard, Brian D. 2014. Ethical perspectives on interpreting and implementing article 4(h). In Africa and the responsibility to protect: article 4(h) of the African Union Constitutive Act, ed. Dan Kuwali and Frans Viljoen, 82–96. London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Liu Xiaoming. 2012. China believes Syria needs a peaceful solution. The Guardian. Feb. 9, 2012. https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2012/feb/09/china-syria-veto-un-resolution. Accessed 22 Feb 2021.

  • Mill, John Stuart. 1974. Utilitarianism. In John Stuart Mill, Utilitarianism, on liberty, essay on Bentham, together with selected writings of Jeremy Bentham and John Austin, ed. Mary Warnock, 251–321. New York: New American Library.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, David. 1995. On nationality. Oxford: Clarendon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Miller, David. 2006. Nationalism. In The Oxford handbook of political theory, ed. John S. Dryzek, Bonnie Honig, and Anne Phillips, 529–545. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Okeja, Uchenna B. 2013. Normative justification of a global ethic: a perspective from African philosophy. Lanham: Lexington Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Parliament of the World’s Religions. 2020. Towards a global ethic: an initial declaration of the parliament of the world’s religions. https://parliamentofreligions.org/documents/towards-global-ethic-initial-declaration-fifth-directive. Accessed 20 Feb 2021.

  • Pattison, James. 2015. Mapping the responsibilities to protect: a typology of international duties. Global Responsibility to Protect 7: 190–210.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pogge, Thomas W. 1992. Cosmopolitanism and sovereignty. Ethics 103: 48–75.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pogge, Thomas. 2006. Moralizing humanitarian intervention: why jurying fails and how law can work. In Humanitarian intervention: nomos XLVII, ed. Terry Nardin and Melissa S. Williams, 158–187. New York: New York University Press.

  • Rawls, John. 1971. A theory of justice. Cambridge: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rawls, John. 1999. The law of peoples with “the idea of public reason revisited”. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Security Council Report. 2020. (1). The Security Council veto. https://www.securitycouncilreport.org/atf/cf/%7B65BFCF9B-6D27-4E9C-8CD3-CF6E4FF96FF9%7D/working_methods_veto.pdf. Accessed 30 Dec 2020.

  • Security Council Report. 2020. (2). UN Security Council working methods: the veto. https://www.securitycouncilreport.org/un-security-council-working-methods/the-veto.php. Accessed 30 December 2020.

  • Security Council Resolution (“S.C. Res.”) 1973. 2011. https://undocs.org/S/RES/1973(2011). Accessed 20 July 2020.

  • U.N. Charter. 1945. https://www.un.org/en/charter-united-nations/. Accessed 20 July 2020.

  • U.N. Universal Declaration of Human Rights (“Universal Declaration”). 1948. G.A. Res. 217A (III). https://www.un.org/en/universal-declaration-human-rights/. Accessed 22 Feb 2021.

  • United Nations. 2017. Russia, China block Security Council action on use of chemical weapons in Syria. 28 February 2017. https://news.un.org/en/story/2017/02/552362-russia-china-block-security-council-action-use-chemical-weapons-syria. Accessed 20 July 2020.

  • United Nations. 2019. Member states exchange views on responsibility to protect, as General Assembly debates best ways for preventing genocide, war crimes. 27 June 2019. https://www.un.org/press/en/2019/ga12159.doc.htm. Accessed 20 July 2020.

  • United Nations World Summit Outcome Document. 2005. G.A. Res. 60/1. https://www.un.org/en/development/desa/population/migration/generalassembly/docs/globalcompact/A_RES_60_1.pdf. Accessed 20 July 2020.

  • Walzer, Michael. 1994. Thick and thin: moral argument at home and abroad. Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Weeramantry, C.G. 1988. Islamic jurisprudence: an international perspective. New York: St. Martin’s Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Brian D. Lepard.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Lepard, B.D. Challenges in Implementing the Responsibility to Protect: The Security Council Veto and the Need for a Common Ethical Approach. J Ethics 25, 223–246 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10892-021-09360-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10892-021-09360-8

Keywords

Navigation