جستجوی مقالات مرتبط با کلیدواژه "doctrine of responsibility to protect" در نشریات گروه "علوم سیاسی"

Exercising commitment or responsibility based on analytical dimensions and the three stages of prevention, response and reconstruction to support the realization of the rights of individuals or societies with specific political conditions and strategies, has the ability to provide the necessary policies to create a lasting peace. . The doctrine of the responsibility to protect international law was introduced in 2001 and adopted by the United Nations General Assembly in 2005. The concept of responsibility is to uphold a new human rights norm to begin the responsibility of the international community to prevent and stop genocide, war crimes.The purpose of this study is to compile a descriptive-analytical method to examine the three stages of responsibility for supporting the Yemeni crisis with the question of what measures have been taken in response to the three dimensions of responsibility for supporting the Yemeni crisis? Considering the extent of the developments in Yemen, the intervention of neighboring powers in this country is one of the problems that has caused the distance between the ruling system and the competent people of the society. The alliance of forces with convergent intellectual and ideological tendencies plays a great role in strengthening the basis of resistance to the threats of foreign interference.

The adoption of the doctrine ((responsibility to protect)) at the United Nations summit in 2005 and turning it into an accepted international norm indicates an important step of the world community to adopt a unified approach to international humanitarian crises. The responsibility to protect implies the responsibility to prevent, respond and rebuild. In the first place, the responsibility of prevention lies with the government and national institutions, if the government is unable or unwilling to do so, the international community and the Security Council at the head of it have the primary responsibility for action and must prevent human rights violations. But the practical test of this doctrine in the Libyan crisis showed that the option of military intervention is more important to the Security Council than other options (civilian options). This is despite the fact that military measures should be used as a last resort and exceptionally when it is feared that the world order and peace will be endangered. The Security Council's inattention to preventive solutions has once again brought criticism to the great powers, especially the permanent members of the Security Council as the competent authority for issuing authorization for action in the form of the doctrine ((responsibility to protect)). After the crises that engulfed the countries of the Middle East and North Africa after January 14, 2011, the country of Yemen also underwent changes. In the continuation of this crisis, a regional coalition led by Saudi Arabia to support the resigned president of Yemen subjected this country to military aggression, which led to the death and injury of many civilians and the occurrence of health and nutritional disasters among civilians, especially became children;

Libyan crisis in 2011 posed many questions regarding the kind and method of reaction made by international community against current international humanitarian crises, especially in the Middle East and North Africa, due to the rapid and decisive reaction of the Security Council in the framework of the doctrine of responsibility to protect and NATO’s military intervention in this country. The opposing goals and interests of great powers in each of these crises and their efforts to ensure their national security and interests and to maximize their relative power and more importantly, the deterrent role of their old rivals in the target country or countries, have led to selective approaches to humanitarian crises including those of Libya and Yemen. In this article, Authors try to study the doctrine of responsibility to protect and meanwhile, to explain the approach taken by great powers, especially the permanent members of the Security Council, to Lybian and Yemeni crisies.