Syria the responsibility to protect. (c2014)

Abstract

The Arab Spring swept in 2011 igniting a process of regime change after decades of dictatorship and authoritarian rule. The revolutions in Tunisia and Egypt were relatively swift and painless and did not require humanitarian interventions. In the case of Libya, stiff and violent resistance from the Qadhafi regime prevented a peaceful transition. Subsequently, the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) drew on a Chapter VII UN Security Council resolution to undertake military action in order to end mass killings and other gross violations of human rights. In the case of Syria, although the casualties were significantly larger and the destruction greater, the UN Security Council was deadlocked, primarily because of the consecutive Russian and Chinese vetoes, and could not reach a decision authorizing humanitarian intervention. One aim of this thesis is to shed light on the underlying causes of this inconsistent international approach to humanitarian interventions. Stated otherwise, the thesis aims at exploring the motives behind the changed attitudes and conduct of Russia and China at the UN Security Council in the case of Syria. The paper further examines how this failure to interfere militarily to end the conflict intensified the need to provide aid to ever growing populations that have been affected by the ranging violence. This leads to an examination of the complex relationship between foreign military intervention and humanitarian aid. Arguing that the provision of aid is a substitute for humanitarian intervention when the political environment does not permit the latter, the thesis allocates ample space for discussing aid politics in the Syrian context.