Navigating between Pragmatism and Principle: Australia’s Foreign Policy Response to the 2017 Rohingya Crisis

IF 0.8 Q3 INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS
Cecilia Jacob
{"title":"Navigating between Pragmatism and Principle: Australia’s Foreign Policy Response to the 2017 Rohingya Crisis","authors":"Cecilia Jacob","doi":"10.1163/1875-984X-13020002","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\n The escalation of violence by Myanmar’s military forces against ethnic Rohingya populations in Rakhine State in 2017 served as a test case for Australia’s commitment to R2P, and its capacity to protect populations from widespread and systematic atrocities in its own regional neighbourhood. Australia’s response to the crisis in Myanmar was mixed; it co-sponsored a UN Human Rights Council resolution to establish the Independent International Fact-Finding Mission on Myanmar that was instrumental in determining the extent and nature of violence committed by Myanmar’s armed forces during the so-called ‘clearance operations’, and provided substantial humanitarian aid for affected Rohingya populations. Australia has, however, been criticised for not doing enough to pressure the government of Myanmar on the issue, for maintaining defence cooperation with Myanmar throughout the crisis, and for its reluctance to accept Rohingya refugees fleeing the violence. This article examines Australia’s response to the Rohingya crisis in the areas of international, regional, and bilateral diplomacy, humanitarian assistance, and defence cooperation. It asks why Australia did not take a more proactive role in confronting atrocities committed by the Myanmar government, and identifies lessons learnt and recommendations for strengthening Australia’s atrocity prevention architecture that is consistent with Australia’s pragmatic approach to regional assistance and its principled international advocacy.","PeriodicalId":38207,"journal":{"name":"Global Responsibility to Protect","volume":"2 1","pages":"1-32"},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2021-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Global Responsibility to Protect","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/1875-984X-13020002","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The escalation of violence by Myanmar’s military forces against ethnic Rohingya populations in Rakhine State in 2017 served as a test case for Australia’s commitment to R2P, and its capacity to protect populations from widespread and systematic atrocities in its own regional neighbourhood. Australia’s response to the crisis in Myanmar was mixed; it co-sponsored a UN Human Rights Council resolution to establish the Independent International Fact-Finding Mission on Myanmar that was instrumental in determining the extent and nature of violence committed by Myanmar’s armed forces during the so-called ‘clearance operations’, and provided substantial humanitarian aid for affected Rohingya populations. Australia has, however, been criticised for not doing enough to pressure the government of Myanmar on the issue, for maintaining defence cooperation with Myanmar throughout the crisis, and for its reluctance to accept Rohingya refugees fleeing the violence. This article examines Australia’s response to the Rohingya crisis in the areas of international, regional, and bilateral diplomacy, humanitarian assistance, and defence cooperation. It asks why Australia did not take a more proactive role in confronting atrocities committed by the Myanmar government, and identifies lessons learnt and recommendations for strengthening Australia’s atrocity prevention architecture that is consistent with Australia’s pragmatic approach to regional assistance and its principled international advocacy.
在实用主义和原则之间导航:澳大利亚对2017年罗兴亚危机的外交政策回应
2017年,缅甸军队对若开邦罗兴亚人的暴力升级,是对澳大利亚履行“保护责任”承诺的一次考验,也是对澳大利亚保护民众免受其所在地区邻国普遍和有系统暴行的能力的一次考验。澳大利亚对缅甸危机的反应好坏参半;它共同发起了一项联合国人权理事会决议,设立缅甸问题独立国际实况调查团,该特派团有助于确定缅甸武装部队在所谓的“清除行动”期间犯下的暴力行为的程度和性质,并为受影响的罗兴亚人提供了大量人道主义援助。然而,澳大利亚一直被批评在这个问题上没有采取足够的措施向缅甸政府施压,在危机期间与缅甸保持防务合作,以及不愿接受逃离暴力的罗兴亚难民。本文探讨了澳大利亚在国际、地区和双边外交、人道主义援助和国防合作等领域对罗兴亚危机的反应。报告询问澳大利亚为何没有在对抗缅甸政府犯下的暴行方面发挥更积极的作用,并确定了经验教训和建议,以加强澳大利亚预防暴行的架构,这符合澳大利亚对区域援助的务实态度及其有原则的国际倡导。
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
Global Responsibility to Protect
Global Responsibility to Protect Social Sciences-Political Science and International Relations
CiteScore
2.40
自引率
44.40%
发文量
42
×
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