CALL FOR CHAPTER PROPOSALS\u00a0<\/b><\/p>\n
Proposal Submission Deadline: November 30, 2021\u00a0<\/b><\/p>\n
Title: Civilian Protection and the Anatomy of the Responsibility to Protect Doctrine in the\u00a0 21st Century\u00a0<\/b><\/p>\n
Editors: Nicholas Idris ERAMEH, PhD & Prof. Victor OJAKOROTU\u00a0<\/b><\/p>\n
Department of Political Studies & International Relations, North West University,\u00a0 Mafikeng Campus, South Africa\u00a0<\/b><\/p>\n
BACKGROUND\u00a0<\/b><\/p>\n
Since the post-cold war era, no other international human rights framework has received wider\u00a0 acceptance like the Responsibility to Protect doctrine (RtoP). The RtoP, which has its roots in the\u00a0 horrors of Rwanda and Kosovo killings, resonated as a time-honored framework in protecting the\u00a0 civilian population faced with imminent threats of War crimes, Ethnic Cleansing Crimes against\u00a0 Humanity, and Genocide. Before adopting the RtoP, a series of arguments and counter-arguments\u00a0 had dominated discourse regarding its legality, considering state claims to sovereignty as enshrined\u00a0 in the United Nations charter. Since its adoption via the World Summit Outcome Document of\u00a0 2005, the doctrine has remained spotlighted among security experts, heads of governments,\u00a0 diplomats, and even academics. While some scholars have argued that the RtoP marks a landmark\u00a0 in responding to mass atrocities against the civilian population in the post-cold war era (Evans\u00a0 2008; Orford 2013), others have raised fears about its implication for state sovereignty (Mamdani\u00a0 2010; Morris 2015). And some strongly believe that the doctrine is nothing but an extension of\u00a0 western imperialism (Wai 2014; Branch 2011; Paris 2014).\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n OBJECTIVE\u00a0<\/b><\/p>\n Despite this ongoing contestation, the 2011 Libyan crisis, a direct consequence of the Arab spring,\u00a0 became the first litmus test for the RtoP. While the method and outcome of the Libyan intervention\u00a0 have met mixed reactions<\/span>, <\/span>the need to authorize the RtoP remains consistently compelling. Apart\u00a0 from the Libya crisis, the RtoP has been allowed via a series of United Nations Security Council\u00a0 Resolutions across the globe including Africa. Notable cases of the RtoP intervention include;\u00a0 Mali, Cote d\u2019 Ivoire, South Sudan, and the Central African Republic. Nonetheless, several mass\u00a0 atrocities in Syria, Ethiopia, Cameroun, Myanmar, China, and India have been against the civilian\u00a0 population with little or no RtoP intervention. Undoubtedly, various emerging and contending\u00a0 issues have continued to trail the RtoP interventions that have been allowed by the United Nations\u00a0 Security Council (UNSC) since the 2011 Libyan crisis.\u00a0\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n At the same time, some of these RtoP authorized cases have consistently exposed inherent\u00a0 institutional, operational, and expectational gaps. These gaps point to the apparent contestation,\u00a0 which suggests that it is yet to reach norm internationalization phase echoed by Finnemore and\u00a0 Sikkink in the Norm Life Cycle Model. Therefore, these most problematic issue provides the\u00a0 basics of carrying out a holistic and comprehensive probing of factors that have accounted for this\u00a0 failure since its adoption via 2005 WSOD. This book will attempt to examine those cases where\u00a0 the RtoP has been successful and vice versa. It examines the dynamics and intricacies of RtoP\u00a0 politics encompassing mobilization and support, expected role of civil society and home\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n government, regional dynamics, veto politics, institutional challenges, expectational gaps, and\u00a0 how they have either helped to consolidate or cause retrogression for the doctrine.\u00a0\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n TARGET AUDIENCE\u00a0<\/b><\/p>\n Contributions to the book are expected from diplomats, academics, policymakers, civil society\u00a0 actors, post-graduate students, early career scholars, security experts, researchers and practitioners\u00a0 across the academic field of Political Science, Peace and Security, Philosophy, International\u00a0 Relations, History, Law and Sociology.\u00a0\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n RECOMMENDED TOPICS\u00a0<\/b><\/p>\n Recommended topics include, but are not limited to the following;\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n SUBMISSION PROCEDURE\u00a0<\/b><\/p>\n Prospective authors are invited to submit an abstract of 300 words to (<\/span>eramehnicholas@gmail.com<\/span> or <\/span>vojakoro@yahoo.com<\/span>) clearly stating the problem they plan to address, on or before 20th\u00a0 November 2021. Authors of qualified abstracts will be notified by 20th December 2021 on further\u00a0 guidelines. Complete chapters of 5000-6000 words are expected to be submitted on or before 15th\u00a0 April 2022. Submitted chapters will undergo a double-blind peer-review process, by chapter\u00a0 contributors and other seasoned experts.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n References\u00a0<\/b><\/p>\n Branch, A. (2011) \u201cThe Responsibility to Protect in Africa\u201d, in <\/span>Critical Perspective of the\u00a0 Responsibility to Protect: Interrogating Theory and Practice<\/span><\/i>, ed P John, New York,\u00a0 Routledge, 103- 125\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n Mamdani M (2010) Responsibility to Protect or Right to Punish? Journal of Intervention and State\u00a0 building, 4(1): 53-67\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n Morris, J. (2015) The Responsibility to Protect and the Use of Force: Remaking the Procrustean\u00a0 Bed? <\/span>Cooperation and Conflict<\/span><\/i>, 51 (2): 200 -215\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n Orford, A. (2013) Moral Internationalism and the Responsibility to Protect, <\/span>The European Journal\u00a0 of International Law<\/span><\/i>, 24 (1): 83 -108\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n Reinold, T. (2010) The Responsibility to Protect \u2013 Much Ado About Nothing? <\/span>Review of\u00a0 International Studies<\/span><\/i>, 36 (1): 55-78\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n Roland, P. (2014) The Responsibility to Protect and the Structural Problems of Preventive\u00a0 Humanitarian Intervention, <\/span>International Peacekeeping<\/span><\/i>, 21 (5); 569 -603\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n Wai, Z (2014) The Empire\u2019s New Clothes: African, Liberal Interventionism and the Contemporary\u00a0 World Order, <\/span>Review of African Political Economy<\/span><\/i>, 41(142): 483 -499<\/span><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" CALL FOR CHAPTER PROPOSALS\u00a0 Proposal Submission Deadline: November 30, 2021\u00a0 Title: Civilian Protection and the Anatomy of the Responsibility to Protect Doctrine in the\u00a0 21st Century\u00a0 Editors: Nicholas Idris ERAMEH, PhD & Prof. Victor OJAKOROTU\u00a0 Department of Political Studies & … Continue reading \n