Tuesday, January 20, 2009
Sunday, May 11, 2008
Responsibility To Protect-Can we invade Myanmar tomorrow?
I had meant to start this blog methodically with the history of Human Rights, but the Myanmar cyclone demolished my plans. So let's jump right in the deep end of human rights with the hot topic of Responsibility To Protect or R2P.
R2P simply means that the international community has a 'responsibility to protect' human beings in any part of the world, from genocide, massive human rights abuses and humanitarian crises, if their own Government is unable or unwilling to protect them. This humanitarian aid can be forced (through peaceful means or even an invasion) over the protests of the home government.
Last Sunday Myanmar was hit by a deadly cyclone. Even as 22,000 Burmese were killed the military dictatorship of Burma (the Junta) refused to admit foreign aid workers. This led to calls for invading Burma and providing humanitarian aid to the Burmese people, through 'responsibility to protect'
Now R2P is an evolving and hotly debated topic in international law and politics but has never been applied to any situation. Its fans want Burma to be the first country where R2P is applied. (Needless to say the Burmese government is not thrilled about it). The concept itself is giving massive headache to international organisations and nations.
R2P enthusiasts say that imposing R2P means that the world will never have another holocaust or massacre like Rwanda where the government colluded in killing its own citizens while the international community watched impotently. However, R2P haters are quick to point out that it means that any nation can invade a country on grounds of humanitarian reasons. (read Mr. Bush and his changing reasons for invading Iraq). To which the fans retort that the checks in R2P ensure that an Iraq like situation will never happen in it.
Methinks that both sides have their valid points. But unless R2P is invoked at least once we will never know the ills which might plague it. Furthermore, the benefits of saving millions of innocent lives outweighs the potential misuse of R2P. (which can be plugged by further checks). Read the following link if you want more information on the topic. www.responsibilitytoprotect.org
Now for the promised joke! What’s misery without a little joke thrown it? (see first post for background information on jokes..:-)
Two human rights activists were walking through a rough part of the city in the evening. They heard moans and muted cries for help from a back lane. Upon investigation, they found a semi-conscious man in a pool of blood. "Help me, I'm a policeman and have been ambushed and viciously beaten" he pleaded. The two human rights activists turned and walked away. One remarked to her colleague: "You know the person that did this really needs help!
Hey, just kidding...thats the sterotype of us bleeding human rights type but its not true.
R2P simply means that the international community has a 'responsibility to protect' human beings in any part of the world, from genocide, massive human rights abuses and humanitarian crises, if their own Government is unable or unwilling to protect them. This humanitarian aid can be forced (through peaceful means or even an invasion) over the protests of the home government.
Last Sunday Myanmar was hit by a deadly cyclone. Even as 22,000 Burmese were killed the military dictatorship of Burma (the Junta) refused to admit foreign aid workers. This led to calls for invading Burma and providing humanitarian aid to the Burmese people, through 'responsibility to protect'
Now R2P is an evolving and hotly debated topic in international law and politics but has never been applied to any situation. Its fans want Burma to be the first country where R2P is applied. (Needless to say the Burmese government is not thrilled about it). The concept itself is giving massive headache to international organisations and nations.
R2P enthusiasts say that imposing R2P means that the world will never have another holocaust or massacre like Rwanda where the government colluded in killing its own citizens while the international community watched impotently. However, R2P haters are quick to point out that it means that any nation can invade a country on grounds of humanitarian reasons. (read Mr. Bush and his changing reasons for invading Iraq). To which the fans retort that the checks in R2P ensure that an Iraq like situation will never happen in it.
Methinks that both sides have their valid points. But unless R2P is invoked at least once we will never know the ills which might plague it. Furthermore, the benefits of saving millions of innocent lives outweighs the potential misuse of R2P. (which can be plugged by further checks). Read the following link if you want more information on the topic. www.responsibilitytoprotect.org
Now for the promised joke! What’s misery without a little joke thrown it? (see first post for background information on jokes..:-)
Two human rights activists were walking through a rough part of the city in the evening. They heard moans and muted cries for help from a back lane. Upon investigation, they found a semi-conscious man in a pool of blood. "Help me, I'm a policeman and have been ambushed and viciously beaten" he pleaded. The two human rights activists turned and walked away. One remarked to her colleague: "You know the person that did this really needs help!
Hey, just kidding...thats the sterotype of us bleeding human rights type but its not true.
Tuesday, May 6, 2008
Why another blog on human rights?
This blog is as much for me as for the readers. I find that even after my ivy league grad school education (i intend to slip in the term ivy league as much as possible..since thats the only value for money i'm getting out of it till now) I am unable to define and explain the term human rights in 30 seconds (or 30 minutes) when asked by a lay person. And if I cant explain them after studying and working in it..then how do I expect the uninitiated to get anything about Human Rights?
Thus this blog is an attempt explain and understand the broad vague term called 'Human Rights' which seems to encompass everything from genocide to a person's social responsibility. I fully reserve the right to slip in as many jokes as i want (since i recently read a book on 'understanding philosophy through jokes'.and though am still mostly clueless about philosophy, I do have lots of jokes to retell). But I have to admit that everybody may not find my brand of funnies,..well... funny..in which case u will just have to lump it. :).
About Me: Ive done my Masters in International Affairs from Columbia University in New York...having specialised in Human Rights and Conflict Resolution. I have spent some time in UN Human Rights Commission and Amnesty International. And in my earlier life I worked as a journalist in India. I am an atheist or a secular humanist by religion...but am enthusiastic about a God and heaven... being sure that if one exists I have a eternal pass on basis of my work in human rights and I wont be denied entry merely on the small technicality of being a non believer. However for now, God's habit of giving a free pass to humans being cruel to other humans makes me feel that the most charitable thing to do for Him would be to deny his existence for now and plod on ourselves..
But I diverge..as i often will..given that its my blog. :). so lets begin next week with 'what is Human Rights' for dummies...
Thus this blog is an attempt explain and understand the broad vague term called 'Human Rights' which seems to encompass everything from genocide to a person's social responsibility. I fully reserve the right to slip in as many jokes as i want (since i recently read a book on 'understanding philosophy through jokes'.and though am still mostly clueless about philosophy, I do have lots of jokes to retell). But I have to admit that everybody may not find my brand of funnies,..well... funny..in which case u will just have to lump it. :).
About Me: Ive done my Masters in International Affairs from Columbia University in New York...having specialised in Human Rights and Conflict Resolution. I have spent some time in UN Human Rights Commission and Amnesty International. And in my earlier life I worked as a journalist in India. I am an atheist or a secular humanist by religion...but am enthusiastic about a God and heaven... being sure that if one exists I have a eternal pass on basis of my work in human rights and I wont be denied entry merely on the small technicality of being a non believer. However for now, God's habit of giving a free pass to humans being cruel to other humans makes me feel that the most charitable thing to do for Him would be to deny his existence for now and plod on ourselves..
But I diverge..as i often will..given that its my blog. :). so lets begin next week with 'what is Human Rights' for dummies...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
