The Resposibility to Protect in the DRC conflict

dc.contributor.advisorLeeuwen, M. van
dc.contributor.authorVries de, Michelle
dc.date.issued2017-06-26
dc.description.abstractThis research aims at explaining the resistant attitude of the UNSC to adopt the R2P-principle in the MONUSCO-mandates for the DRC conflict between 2010-2015. A reference to the R2P-principle within the MONUSCO-mandates between 2010-2015 would be expected given the grand scale of human rights violations taking place during the DRC conflict, and the prioritization of the protection of civilians within the mandates. Still, the tool specifically designed to respond to human rights violations and protect civilians was not referred to in any of the MONUSCO-mandates between 2010-2015. In order to explain this outcome, three distinct theoretical perspectives on norm compliance are used to identify possible causal mechanisms, namely Realism, Constructivism and Poststructuralism. Discourse analyses and in-depth interviews are used to trace whether these mechanisms are present and whether they can explain the puzzling outcome. Ultimately, it is concluded that the Constructivist and Poststructuralist perspectives offer insightful explanations for the outcome. The stage in which the R2P-principle is and the conditions under which the principle exists between 2010-2015, as well as the prevailing discourse concerning the DRC conflict within the UNSC between 2010-2015 help explain why the UNSC does not refer to the principle in the MONUSCO-mandates between 2010-2015.en_US
dc.identifier.urihttp://theses.ubn.ru.nl/handle/123456789/4215
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.thesis.facultyFaculteit der Managementwetenschappenen_US
dc.thesis.specialisationConflict, Power, and Politicsen_US
dc.thesis.studyprogrammeMaster Political Scienceen_US
dc.thesis.typeMasteren_US
dc.titleThe Resposibility to Protect in the DRC conflicten_US
Files