The creation of nation states with the sine qua non of sovereignty and territorial integrity marked a paradigm shift in the governance of the world. Political thought seems to have declared it as the ultimate political construct. That is how we govern ourselves today. If we add self-determination as the only guiding principle for the creation of nations, then we come one stage further. And with this when democracy is placed as the governance mechanism, the royal political treat is complete. Without getting into some visible fissures in operational democracies in many states, and also the nature of leadership it throws up, at times, what is more important is to understand, whether sovereignty has any limitations.
That sovereignty is both complete and absolute, is what we have been made to believe as followers of political proclamations of every type. The United Nations has through peacekeeping, political transition, capacity and nation building and stabilizing missions has entered quite a few nations in the last few decades. Does it challenge the concept of sovereignty and what is the legal basis in working over and above the concept of nation states? Is it warranted and what does it mean to the world? Afghanistan has been left to the throes of destiny. Is it proper? Does humanity precede sovereignty in specific circumstances? What does the world do in such circumstances, in cases of systematic violation of human rights; genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity?
I have had the personal experience of serving in Kosovo and Sudan, where the responsibility to protect was put in action. Kosovo precedes the codification of it. What is then the responsibility to protect? ”The responsibility to protect embodies a political commitment to end the worst forms of violence and persecution.” This is also a political / international relations concept and practice aiming at narrowing the gap which is found in the member states of UN in ”pre-existing obligations under international humanitarian and human rights law and the reality faced by their populations,” at the risk of genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity. The machinations behind the Balkans, Sudan, Rwanda etc will not end in the foreseeable future.
The process of codification of this right started in a 2001 report titled The Responsibility to Protect, which was later adopted by the UN Secretary General’s 2005 report In Larger Freedom. The world needs it today for sure, or else rulers, dictatorships or democracies, whatever, would ride roughshod over their targeted populations without any succour. The primary responsibility for the protection of its people rested first and foremost with the state itself. However, ’residual responsibility’ lied with the international community (broader community of states). This could be ”activated when a particular state is clearly either unwilling or unable to fulfil its responsibility to protect or is itself the actual perpetrator of crimes and atrocities.” The fate of people of Afghanistan would have been different, if this right was upheld and acted upon.
STAGNATION OF POLITICAL THOUGHT, IS ALSO THE STAGNATION OF NATIONS.
Sanjay Sahay