The Rwanda Genocide and the Responsibility to Protect Doc trine

This week I opened the assessment for public policy in 2305. I'll post a few items related to each subject - foreign, economic and social welfare policy. Here's one for foreign policy:

Yesterday was the 20th anniversary of the start of the Rwandan Massacre.

- Click here for the Wikipedia page on it.
- Click here for BBC News' background.

The United States did not respond to the massacre until well after the killing was done - neither did much of the international community. There was little interest in the US getting involved in what was essentially an internal dispute in a country that was not vitally important to the US, but the reality of the fact that a million people were hacked to death in 100 days while we sat on the side lines led to a reevaluation of why the US might wish to commit armed forces.

In response a new doctrine was developed - the responsibility to protect doctrine that is based on "three pillars:"

1. A state has a responsibility to protect its population from genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity, and ethnic cleansing.
2. The international community has a responsibility to assist the state to fulfill its primary responsibility.
3. If the state manifestly fails to protect its citizens from the four above mass atrocities and peaceful measures have failed, the international community has the responsibility to intervene through coercive measures such as economic sanctions. Military intervention is considered the last resort.

No surprise that it is controversial, especially since it has been applied inconsistently. It was used to justify US intervention in Libya, but not in Syria.

Some links:

- Click here for the Wikipedia on the doctrine.
- A Frontline documentary on it.