Libya and the state of intervention

Dunne, T; Gifkins, J

Libya and the state of intervention

Dunne, T Gifkins, J

Permalink

Publisher:: Taylor & Francis
Publication Type:: Journal Article
Citation:: Australian Journal of International Affairs, 2011, 65, (5), pp. 515-529
Issue Date:: 2011-11-01

Closed Access

	Filename	Description	Size
	Libya and the State of Intervention _ prepublication version.pdf	Accepted version	172.37 kB	Adobe PDF	View/Open

Copyright Clearance Process

Recently Added
In Progress
Closed Access

This item is closed access and not available.

Full metadata record

Field	Value	Language
dc.contributor.author	Dunne, T
dc.contributor.author	Gifkins, J https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0551-787X
dc.date.accessioned	2023-10-18T04:03:13Z
dc.date.available	2023-10-18T04:03:13Z
dc.date.issued	2011-11-01
dc.identifier.citation	Australian Journal of International Affairs, 2011, 65, (5), pp. 515-529
dc.identifier.issn	1035-7718
dc.identifier.issn	1465-332X
dc.identifier.uri	http://hdl.handle.net/10453/172791
dc.description.abstract	The international response to the crisis in Libya has been remarkably quick and decisive. Where many other cases of mass atrocity crimes have failed to generate sufficient and timely political will to protect civilians at risk, the early response to Libya in 2011 has shown that the United Nations Security Council is able to give effect to the 'responsibility to protect' norm. While not an implementing party in a legal sense, the Australian government has taken a forward-leaning diplomatic stance in helping to mobilise broad support for addressing this crisis. In light of the ongoing political controversy over armed humanitarian intervention, the Libya case shows that state-based advocacy for R2P matters, given the on-going need to bolster the legitimacy of the principle. A discussion of Canberra's diplomatic activity is a prelude to an examination of the proceedings of the UN Security Council and the two key resolutions, the second of which gave effect to the forcible action. The article then considers three dimensions of the Security Council's implementation of the responsibility to protect: the language of the resolutions and the intriguing absence of a textual reference to the international community's responsibility to act; the expansive mandate for civilian protection in Security Council resolution 1973; and the first unanimous referral to the International Criminal Court, with novel support from the United States of America. © 2011 Australian Institute of International Affairs.
dc.language	en
dc.publisher	Taylor & Francis
dc.relation.ispartof	Australian Journal of International Affairs
dc.relation.isbasedon	10.1080/10357718.2011.613148
dc.rights	info:eu-repo/semantics/closedAccess
dc.subject	1605 Policy and Administration, 1606 Political Science
dc.subject.classification	International Relations
dc.subject.classification	4407 Policy and administration
dc.subject.classification	4408 Political science
dc.title	Libya and the state of intervention
dc.type	Journal Article
utslib.citation.volume	65
utslib.for	1605 Policy and Administration
utslib.for	1606 Political Science
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences
pubs.organisational-group	/University of Technology Sydney/Faculty of Arts and Social Sciences/School of International Studies
utslib.copyright.status	closed_access	*
dc.date.updated	2023-10-18T04:03:12Z
pubs.issue	5
pubs.publication-status	Published
pubs.volume	65
utslib.citation.issue	5

Abstract:

The international response to the crisis in Libya has been remarkably quick and decisive. Where many other cases of mass atrocity crimes have failed to generate sufficient and timely political will to protect civilians at risk, the early response to Libya in 2011 has shown that the United Nations Security Council is able to give effect to the 'responsibility to protect' norm. While not an implementing party in a legal sense, the Australian government has taken a forward-leaning diplomatic stance in helping to mobilise broad support for addressing this crisis. In light of the ongoing political controversy over armed humanitarian intervention, the Libya case shows that state-based advocacy for R2P matters, given the on-going need to bolster the legitimacy of the principle. A discussion of Canberra's diplomatic activity is a prelude to an examination of the proceedings of the UN Security Council and the two key resolutions, the second of which gave effect to the forcible action. The article then considers three dimensions of the Security Council's implementation of the responsibility to protect: the language of the resolutions and the intriguing absence of a textual reference to the international community's responsibility to act; the expansive mandate for civilian protection in Security Council resolution 1973; and the first unanimous referral to the International Criminal Court, with novel support from the United States of America. © 2011 Australian Institute of International Affairs.

Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:

http://hdl.handle.net/10453/172791