著者

澤田 眞治

出版者

一般財団法人 日本国際政治学会

雑誌

国際政治 (ISSN:04542215)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.2018, no.194, pp.194_62-194_78, 2018-12-25 (Released:2019-05-16)

参考文献数

86

---

In 2011, in the aftermath of the collapse of Gaddafi regime in Libya promoted by the aerial bombardment of NATO, President Rousseff of Brazil proposed “Responsibility while Protecting” (RWP) in UN General Assembly. Brazil submitted the detailed concept note of RWP constituted of numerous proposals that are to complement “Responsibility to Protect” (R2P): among them, to place the three pillars of R2P under the strict political subordination and chronological sequencing, to impose strict conditions on the use of force, and to establish a proactive mechanism of monitoring and evaluation of military activities by Security Council so as to assure accountability.The principles of “non-interference” and “non-use of force” had been long-held diplomatic traditions of Brazil as they were in other Latin American countries. However, in the 21th century, under Lula da Silva’s administration, Brazil expressed a new attitude of “non-indifference” in addition to the traditional non-interference and participated in United Nations Stabilization Mission in Haiti (MINUSTAH), with the view to promote its presence as a candidate of new permanent member of Security Council. Nonetheless, Brazil was skeptical about R2P, assuming it as a new form of right of interference and maintaining traditional idea of “sovereignty as shield”. RWP was the way to reconcile the traditional idea and Brazil’s new role in UN as an emerging power.Brazilian proposal of RWP had major repercussions in international community because the overthrow of Libyan government had caused considerable concerns about R2P among emerging powers and developing countries. They concern for possible “misuse” of R2P as a tool to achieve regime change with armed force reflecting particular interest of the West. The implementation of R2P became the focus of controversy between the supportive West and skeptical South. While the West criticized RWP preferring to keep operational flexibility of military activities in implementing R2P, the emerging powers, especially South Africa and India, and some developing countries supported RWP to prevent selective invocation of R2P and misuse of the mandate. Failing to reach consensus, Brazil virtually withdrew RWP proposal.Almost as if to inherit this proposal, in 2012 China proposed “Responsible Protection” (RP) similar to RWP. However, in contrast to Brazilian RWP invented to bridge the gap between the supporters and the skeptics of R2P, Chinese RP is like a “long wall” or seawall to guard the cohesion of skeptical countries against R2P from the erosion by global tides of the idea of ‘sovereignty as responsibility’.RWP was an important attempt where non-Western country had played a significant role as a norm-shaper in international norm-making process in which the West had been dominant. Brazilian efforts to bridge the global gap would continue to give instructions in global norm-making on humanitarian issues and intervention.