The three pillars of the R2P are respectively the responsibility to prevent, react and rebuild. The former is considered the most relevant for the simple fact that the international community, in the respect of a common humanity and moral duty, cannot afford itself to wait until the blowing up of a humanitarian crisis, such as genocide and, in general, a large scale loss of lives. Otherwise the lack of prevention would be an implicit contradiction in the purposes of the UN. However, the armed intervention is always mentioned as the last and most extreme resource. The question is: are the dialogue and diplomacy always morally correct alternatives?
In an interview for the Rwanda genocide documentary, the UN force commander in Rwanda, Gen…show more content… The negotiation can exist between rational beings, but there is no rationality when men kill other men, women and children with their machetes, leaving wounded bodies on the streets, because of an ancient rivalry between tribes such as in Rwanda. Unfortunately, dialogue is not always possible and also the catholic church supports this idea. Talking about the possibility to build a dialogue with extremist factions of the Islam, such as the terrorist organization ISIL, the Archbishop Michael Fitzgerald…show more content… “ There is one bad thing as bad as using military forces when we shouldn’t, it is not using military force when we should” ( see reference evans 2008)
Conclusion
In an organization as the UN, hesitation could lead to incorrect decisions tragic consequences. The result is a sort of vicious circle which can undermine the credibility of this organization and trigger strong instability that could distract the global community from its real goal: ensure peace.
This paper has gone through important points that nowadays closely regard the armed intervention, above all the humanitarian one. Critical points of view are important to understand the flaws and the risks of the UNSC, organism from which the international stability rely on. Frome these premises the global community has the duty to commit itself and create the change it want to see in the world.
The common goal need to be the creation of a common consensus and institutionalize the practice of armed intervention, in order to ensure the readiness of response. As Evans says in its book the Responsibility to
