International Challenges of the Responsibility to Protect in Contemporary International Law: A Conceptual Analysis and Case Study Examination of Global Crises

Abstract

The Responsibility to Protect (R2P), as one of the emerging principles of international law, was adopted with the aim of preventing the occurrence of atrocity crimes such as genocide, ethnic cleansing, and war crimes. This study examines the international challenges of the Responsibility to Protect (R2P) within the framework of contemporary international law and, using a descriptive-analytical approach, identifies three levels of challenges—conceptual, legal, and operational. Through case studies of the crises in Rwanda, Syria, and Ukraine, the article conducts a comparative analysis of the successes and failures of R2P in preventing and responding to mass atrocities. The primary objective of this research is to identify theoretical, legal, and practical challenges in implementing this doctrine and to assess its effectiveness in various crises. The main research questions include: (1) What conceptual and theoretical challenges exist in the interpretation and implementation of R2P? (2) How do legal conflicts between R2P and fundamental principles of international law affect its effectiveness? (3) How has R2P performed in the crises of Rwanda, Syria, and Ukraine? The findings indicate that R2P faces significant challenges related to conceptual ambiguities, contradictions with state sovereignty and the veto power, and failures in responding to crises. These challenges have undermined the effectiveness of the principle in addressing humanitarian catastrophes. Furthermore, the results emphasize the necessity of reforming the Security Council, strengthening regional cooperation, and improving preventive measures.