|
Venezuela – No, The “Responsibility To Protect” Does Not Apply
Richard Haass is the president of the Council of Foreign Relations. On Friday, before the failed delivery of fake "humanitarian aid" to Venezuela, he opined that the rejection of the "aid" would justify an intervention based on the dubious doctrine of a Responsibility to Protect (R2P):
Richard N. Haass @RichardHaass – 19:26 utc – 22 Feb 2019
What the Maduro regime is doing to the people of Venezuela is inconsistent with the obligations that come with being a sovereign state. The time has come for the UN or OAS or Lima Group to consider how to apply the Responsibility to Protect (R2P) doctrine. bit.ly/2TZaoZv
bigger
Haass attached a link to a report by the Crisis Group which summarized the situation at that time:
High Noon over Humanitarian Aid at Venezuela’s Border
Attaching the Crisis Group piece is an apt display of the utter stupidity of Richard Haass. That's because the report completely contradicts his argument. The principle of the Responsibility to Protect ..
.. is based upon the underlying premise that sovereignty entails a responsibility to protect all populations from mass atrocity crimes and human rights violations. The principle is based on a respect for the norms and principles of international law, especially the underlying principles of law relating to sovereignty, peace and security, human rights, and armed conflict.
The Crisis Group report argues, quite correctly, that the Venezuelan government is legally justified to reject the "aid". Thus R2P, which presuppose that a state does not fulfill is legal obligations, can not apply to the case:
Under international law, governments must give consent to the distribution of food and medical supplies when a population’s survival is threatened, but only if the aid is of an exclusively humanitarian and impartial nature. This aid operation, however, is primarily political, in that it is intended to undermine Maduro and bring about a change of government.
The acts of the Venezuelan government were fully consistent with "the obligations that come with being a sovereign state".
To recommend a legal procedure and policy by linking to a report that contradicts that reasoning is quite daft.
Furthermore Haass wants "the UN or OAS or Lima Group to consider how to apply the Responsibility to Protect".
But neither the Organisation of American States nor the Lima Group, a Canadian plot together with some Central and South American states to attack Venezuela, can apply R2P beyond the already taken sanction measures:
The Responsibility to Protect provides a framework for employing measures that already exist (i.e., mediation, early warning mechanisms, economic sanctions, and chapter VII powers) to prevent atrocity crimes and to protect civilians from their occurrence. The authority to employ the use of force under the framework of the Responsibility to Protect rests solely with United Nations Security Council and is considered a measure of last resort.
The UNSC will of course reject any U.S. attempt to apply R2P with regards to Venezuela.
The only and last time that the Security Council passed a chapter VII resolution based on R2P was with regards to Libya. The resolution allowed other states to protect the civilian population of Libya by force. The U.S. and others abused the resolution to overthrow the Libyan government and to completely destroyed the country. China and Russia certainly noted that. They will never again let such a resolution pass.
That Senator Marco Rubio, a driving power behind the campaign against Venezuela, explicitly posted these pictures of Muhammad Ghaddafi before and after R2P was applied, only strengthens the case against it.
bigger
https://www.nato.int/docu/speech/1998/s981112a.htm have a look
Westphalian principles of “sovereignty entails a responsibility to protect all populations from mass atrocity crimes and human rights violations. The principle is based on a respect for the norms and principles of international law [economics, especially the underlying principles of law relating to sovereignty, peace and security, human rights, and [victimizing armed conflict. <= HAass "
The human problem is 7 billion or more humans in the world have left the determination of relations between a nation state organized to serve an economic interest to the proven, most greedy in the world (politicians: in charge of Armed Rule-Making nation state Structures (ARMS)) to resolve the relations between the ARMS and the humanity issues.
But humanity trapped and resides within is not a part of the purpose of developing an ARMS and organizing it into a named nation state. Humanity should negotiate with the states, (not the politicians of one state negotiating with the politicians of the other states, not even all of the nation states getting together, because their interest is economic not human). Resolving human rights and defending human rights and advancing human privilege are, according to our Makers’ design, superior to, and outside of the jurisdiction of the economic conflict. Economic differences between or within an ARMS are resolved by wars, but human conflicts with those who prosecute economics are undefended and unrepresented. The ARMS developed the UN, and then used it for their political interest, but never have they used an international organization to resolve conflicts between an ARMS and the humanity it contains or invades.
Humanity, is stronger than all of the nations put together (hands down), but global humanity has never organized. Humanity has no representative with any power any where in the world. Humanity has been forced to depend on one or more ARMS, or organized created and managed by ARMS to defend human rights and supply human needs. ARMS have proven by the calendar of history to be incapable of protecting humanity, and even to avoid the abuse of humanity itself, because advancing economics conflicts with defending humanity.
Its time the humans in the world self organize (deny membership to any nation state, or to any ARMS). With objects that demand and insist that governments, nation states, kingdoms ARMS of any kind all and each relinquish their claims to a right to use or abuse humanity. Why? Because long years of UN, the League of Nations and other organizations created supposedly to address human rights have failed humanity. These international organizations organized by persons in charge of economic entities have been unable to solve the conflict between the rights of humanity and the demands of economics. Every human is entitled to a victim-free conflict-free secure environment to live in, but every government denies that security because it is advancing their cause in economics.
I propose a purely human organization: one that would operate in complete transparency to national boundaries (truly global). Its membership would deny eligibility to every human being employed by, connected to, or employed by, elected to, or contracted with a government, an affiliate of government, a corporation(profit or not) or a nation state or an ARMS.
In other words, the needs and fears of humanity differ so much from the nation state system and its siblings, that the nation states, kingdoms, (ARMS of any type) and humanity that occupy them are opponents in interest, need and expectation. Each ARMS is organised, in one fashion or the other, to maximize a system of economics, each ARMS is a designed (structure) with a design purpose to organize the people and resources within a bounded area (nation state(ARMS)) in order to advance, defend, and foster (ADF) the economic assets, economic activity, and economic earnings(AAE) of the ARMS for the designers. Economics of any kind suppresses humanity; but both humanity and economics are in some ways dependent upon each other for progress and survival. Its the unbalanced relative power of the ARMS over humanity that has brought the world to war.
The ARMS are designed by those in control of the territory claimed by the ARMS. The ARMS are designed to use and to employ the minds and manpower as resources to accomplish economic objectives no matter the abuse and denial to humanity. Tere is no human representation capable to limit the abuse the prosecution of economics can bring to humanity trapped within the boundaries of an Armed Rule-Making Structure (ARMS).
A possible name of such an organization might be Humanity for Humans HFH and its purpose objects might be to give balance to the relations between economic interest and human interest and to prosecute the human cases against the Nation State System (the ARMS).
Posted by: snake | Feb 26 2019 15:44 utc | 86
|
