THE EU AND RESPONSIBILITY TO PROTECT: CASE STUDIES ON THE EU’S RESPONSE TO MASS ATROCITIES IN LIBYA, SOUTH SUDAN AND MYANMAR

Q3 Social Sciences
D. Dvornichenko, V. Barskyy
{"title":"THE EU AND RESPONSIBILITY TO PROTECT: CASE STUDIES ON THE EU’S RESPONSE TO MASS ATROCITIES IN LIBYA, SOUTH SUDAN AND MYANMAR","authors":"D. Dvornichenko, V. Barskyy","doi":"10.22598/iele.2020.7.1.7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The article is devoted to the study of the evolution of the European Union (EU) approach towards the Responsibility to Protect (R2P). The paper refers to the case study method used to assess the EU’s capacity to respond adequately to the particular mass atrocity cases – Libya, South Sudan, and Myanmar. The methodology of the paper is based on a discursive analytical approach, which requires a thorough examination of the official declarations, statements, and resolutions adopted by the EU in the scope of EU foreign and security policy. The article focuses on clear dis-tinctions between the EU’s approach to these cases, reveals several weaknesses and hidden reputational risks in the EU’s response to mass atrocity situations as well as offers several recommendations on how to overcome identified deficiencies.","PeriodicalId":52280,"journal":{"name":"InterEULawEast","volume":"721 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"InterEULawEast","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.22598/iele.2020.7.1.7","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The article is devoted to the study of the evolution of the European Union (EU) approach towards the Responsibility to Protect (R2P). The paper refers to the case study method used to assess the EU’s capacity to respond adequately to the particular mass atrocity cases – Libya, South Sudan, and Myanmar. The methodology of the paper is based on a discursive analytical approach, which requires a thorough examination of the official declarations, statements, and resolutions adopted by the EU in the scope of EU foreign and security policy. The article focuses on clear dis-tinctions between the EU’s approach to these cases, reveals several weaknesses and hidden reputational risks in the EU’s response to mass atrocity situations as well as offers several recommendations on how to overcome identified deficiencies.
欧盟与保护责任:欧盟应对利比亚、南苏丹和缅甸大规模暴行的案例研究
本文致力于研究欧盟(EU)在保护责任(R2P)方面的演变。本文引用了案例研究方法,用于评估欧盟对利比亚、南苏丹和缅甸等特定大规模暴行案件作出充分反应的能力。本文的方法论基于话语分析方法,这需要对欧盟在欧盟外交和安全政策范围内通过的官方声明、声明和决议进行彻底的检查。本文重点讨论了欧盟处理这些案件的方法之间的明显区别,揭示了欧盟在应对大规模暴行情况时的一些弱点和潜在的声誉风险,并就如何克服已发现的缺陷提出了一些建议。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
InterEULawEast
InterEULawEast Social Sciences-Law
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
11
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信