نوع مقاله : مقاله علمی- پژوهشی مستقل
موضوعات
عنوان مقاله English
نویسنده English
The doctrines of humanitarian intervention and "unwilling and unable," closely linked to the Responsibility to Protect (R2P), provide frameworks for addressing humanitarian crises when states fail to protect their populations from atrocities like genocide, war crimes, and ethnic cleansing. These doctrines, however, face legal, political, and practical challenges, often clashing with state sovereignty under Article 2(7) of the UN Charter. This study employs a descriptive-analytical approach to examine these frameworks, distinguishing humanitarian intervention’s unilateral tendencies from R2P’s structured, UN-authorized approach. Through case studies of Libya (2011), Syria (2012–present), and the Rohingya crisis (2017), it analyzes their alignment with these doctrines, their challenges, and proposes practical reforms to enhance clarity, accountability, and effectiveness. By addressing ambiguities, political misuse, and sovereignty tensions, this study aims to strengthen global mechanisms for atrocity prevention while respecting international legal principles.
کلیدواژهها English
