On 16 April the United Nations (UN) Security Council marked the 20th anniversary of the Rwandan genocide by holding a briefing on “threats to international peace and security: prevention and the fight against genocide.” Convened under the Presidency of Nigeria, the meeting included opening statements by UN Deputy Secretary-General Jan Eliasson and H.E. Mr. Colin Keating, former Permanent Representative of New Zealand to the UN and President of the UN Security Council in April 1994 during the start of the genocide in Rwanda.

A Resolution (S/Res/2150) on the prevention of genocide was unanimously adopted at the start of the briefing. This is the first Security Council resolution to discuss genocide as a stand-alone issue and “calls upon states to reaffirm paragraphs 138 and 139 of the World Summit Outcome Document on the responsibility to protect populations from genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity.” The resolution was co-sponsored by 48 member states, including all 15 Security Council members.

Thirteen Member States Referenced R2P

Argentina, Australia, Chad, Chile, China, France, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Republic of Korea, Rwanda, the United Kingdom and the United States.

References to the Responsibility to Protect

Mr. Jan Eliasson, UN Deputy Secretary General

“In conclusion, we must do more as a community of nations and as global citizens if we are to live up to the promise of ‘never again’ and act upon our collective responsibility to protect.”

H.E. Mr. Colin Keating

“I would like to add that the development of the principle of responsibility to protect, which is referenced so clearly in the draft resolution before the Council today, gives further reason for hope. Recent Council practice in Mali and the Central African Republic and with the Force Intervention Brigade in the Democratic Republic of the Congo further demonstrates that some important lessons have been learned.”

Australia

“The unanimous endorsement by Heads of State and Government of the responsibility to protect (R2P) in 2005 was a resounding acknowledgment that, while States have the primary responsibility to protect their own populations from mass atrocities, we, the international community, and the Council must provide protection where national Governments have manifestly failed. On behalf of the Group of Friends of R2P, comprising 45 States in total, including 10 members of the Council, we welcome the references to R2P in resolution 2150 (2014), which we have just adopted. While that is an essential normative response to our past failures, the challenge, as always, is implementation. We must do all that we can to operationalize R2P.”

Argentina

“To prevent is to assume responsibility to protect. To prevent is to listen to individuals, regional organizations and the people of every nation State who can give voice to their experience and not to papers issued from ivory towers that merely imagine what others may be going through. To prevent is to continue to strengthen international human rights law.”

Chad

“In conclusion, we believe that the Security Council should react with urgency in the event of mass crimes based on its responsibility to protect. The resolution that we have just adopted (resolution 2150 (2014)) translates, we hope, our shared determination and will to continue to fight against the crimes of genocide and serious violations of human rights.”

Chile

“Each State has the primary responsibility to protect its population against massive and widespread human rights abuses. The international community must stand by and support Member States when they willfully or owing to a clear inability do not meet that obligation under the concept of the responsibility to protect, enshrined in the 2005 World Summit Outcome (General Assembly resolution 60/1). Chile has convened a series of seminars and meetings at home in the context of its commitment to the concept of the responsibility to protect and its preventive nature. This year, we hope to hold a new outreach seminar at the inter-sectoral level together with the Global Centre for the Responsibility to Protect.”

China

“Secondly, in order to effectively prevent genocide, countries and their Governments should fulfil their duties and obligations. Governments bear the primary responsibility in protecting their civilians. Governments and parties to conflicts should all abide by international humanitarian law and the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, among other international obligations, and spare no effort to protect civilians from genocide.”

France

“To prevent is also to act. A second note of progress was the adoption in 2005 by the Heads of State and of Government of the concept of responsibility to protect. When a Government cannot or will not assume responsibility to protect, the international community must assume that responsibility, including by taking resolute and timely action. France is currently engaged in Mali and the Central African Republic, at the request of the authorities and under Council mandate, to assist the endangered populations. In those countries and in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, the Council has given the kind of robust protection of civilians mandate that UNAMIR lacked in 1994. That progress should be consolidated. The Council must continue to play its full role in implementing the responsibility to protect.”

Lithuania

“All of this speaks to the fact that further progress is needed in translating into action the concept of the responsibility to protect, the most important and imaginative doctrine to emerge on the international scene for decades, as Louise Arbour put it. With adequate information, mobilization, courage and, first and foremost, political will, genocide can be prevented. We, the international community, must cultivate and build that political will, or even the best of concepts and conventions will fail to protect the world from crimes against humanity and genocide.”

“The responsibility to protect to which Member States committed themselves in 2005 must be honoured and acted on consistently. National Governments bear the primary responsibility for protecting their populations, including through human rights education and preventive measures, such as countering incitement, extremism and hate speech, intolerance and discrimination, as well as by practicing accountability to their citizens themselves.”

Luxembourg

“The genocide in Rwanda unleashed a shock wave that rocked the entire United Nations. It raised fundamental questions about the authority and responsibility of the Security Council, the effectiveness of United Nations peacekeeping, the scope of international justice, the roots of violence and the responsibility of the international community to protect endangered populations from genocide. I shall focus on two points: the responsibility to protect and the fight against impunity. The 1994 genocide highlighted the need for the United Nations to strengthen its capacity to respond to serious violations of human rights and international humanitarian law, and to give greater attention to the prevention of mass atrocities. It was a catalyst to the development of the principle of the responsibility to protect populations from genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity. This principle, which Luxembourg fully supports, was endorsed by the 2005 World Summit. Since then, the Security Council has invoked the responsibility to protect several times, most recently in South Sudan, Yemen, Mali and the Central African Republic. The Council must continue on this path and embody the principle of the responsibility to protect in all its dimensions.”

Nigeria

“One year later, at the 2005 World Summit, leaders from across the world agreed on the responsibility to protect populations against the four mass atrocities — genocide, ethnic cleansing, war crimes and crimes against humanity. We appreciate the SecretaryGeneral’s past reports on the subject in which he has proposed tools for genocide prevention, including the report of January 2009 on “Implementing the responsibility to protect” (A/63/677), the July 2010 report on “Early warning, assessment and the responsibility to protect” (A/64/864), and the July 2013 report on “Responsibility to protect: State responsibility and prevention” (S/2013/399). In July 2009, the Secretary-General presented his January 2009 report to the General Assembly, and in the same month a General Assembly plenary debate on the responsibility to protect was held (A/63/PV.97). The debate presented delegations with an opportunity to demonstrate their support for implementing their commitments under the 2005 World Summit Outcome Document (resolution 60/1). Similarly, following the release of the July 2010 report, the General Assembly, on 9 August 2010, convened an informal interactive dialogue on the main themes of the report. Nigeria was one of the eight countries that participated in that dialogue.”

Republic of Korea

“The responsibility of States to protect their own people should be given more attention, and the discussions on the responsibility to protect should produce more tangible results.”

Rwanda

“I also acknowledge the presence of Deputy SecretaryGeneral Jan Eliasson, a man who has rallied the United Nations system to learn from its failure in Rwanda in 1994 and who has played an important role in the liberation and promotion of our responsibility to protect.”

“Since the tragedy that occurred in Rwanda, the Organization has deployed efforts to prevent genocide and mass atrocities by improving the capacity of the United Nations system, mobilizing the political will of key Member States and trying to learn lessons from the failures of the recent past — without, however, reaching their full potential. Those efforts range from endorsement in 2005 at the World Summit of the concept of the responsibility to protect; the enhancement of the agenda on the protection of civilians through normative frameworks; the creation of the Office of the Special Adviser on the Prevention of Genocide; and, in relation to the responsibility to protect, the implementation of the Rights Up Front action plan as a tool for the United Nations to improve prevention by instituting a due-diligence policy on human rights to help enforce United Nations purposes and principles as set out in the Charter.”

United Kingdom

“We must get better at translating early warning into effective preventive action and that requires political will. Political will is a responsibility of every single member of the Security Council and especially every permanent member of the Security Council. The responsibility to protect initiative of 2005 is another positive development and is increasingly incorporated into national Governments’ deliberations. We must support States that are building their capacity on the preventative aspects of the responsibility to protect and help them to respond to tensions before they escalate.”

United States

“Today we consider again the paramount question of lessons learned — learned not just in theory or on paper but truly understood, felt and applied in practice. In so doing, we benefit from instruments that did not exist two decades ago, including the Office of the United Nations Special Adviser on the Prevention of Genocide, the Office of the High Commissioner for Human Rights, the International Criminal Court, the responsibility to protect doctrine, improvements in regional peacekeeping capabilities — and in that regard I would note in particular the participation of Rwandan peacekeepers who perform exceptionally and admirably in the cause of atrocity prevention in the Central African Republic and elsewhere — more nimble deployment of accountability mechanisms, and a welcome surge within civil society of anti-genocide awareness and activism.”

Global Network of R2P Focal Points

Australia

“Prevention also requires a robust civil society and nongovernmental organizations, parliaments and media. National legislation can be instrumental and education decisive. The designation of a national R2P focal point within countries can help to integrate an atrocity prevention perspective in national policies. Focal points can form instrumental networks, especially across combustible regions, for helping to prevent atrocity crimes. Australia, together with Ghana, Costa Rica and Denmark, co-facilitate the R2P focal points initiative. We encourage Member States that have not already done so to appoint a national R2P focal point.”

France

“The Organization must serve as a model. All tools must be mobilized — our human rights mechanisms; the network of focal points for the responsibility to protect, in which we participate; our horizon-scanning meetings in the Security Council, which are integral parts of our preventive diplomacy efforts that would benefit from being organized regularly.”

Rights Up Front

Mr. Jan Eliasson, UN Deputy Secretary-General

“The recently launched Rights Up Front initiative aims to improve our ability to respond to serious violations of human rights, which often are early warning signs of mass atrocities and of conflicts to come. The initiative is meant to generate early action and more active engagement by Member States and by the different entities of the United Nations system.”

Australia

“The Council should support the vital Rights Up Front initiative, as we now know that human rights violations are often the canary in the mineshaft. We see that in the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea and will be briefed by the commission of inquiry on human rights in the Arria format tomorrow. We should also support the provision of peacekeeping operations with robust mandates. The protection of civilians must always be at the core of United Nations efforts to secure peace.”

Argentina

“Among the three dimensions of prevention, the strengthening of norms and the culture of human rights and international humanitarian law, and the fight against impunity, I wish to stress that of prevention.” “To put rights up front is a synonym; it is the antonym of placing disputes over power first. It is to place the human rights of all human beings first.”

Chile

“In that regard, we emphasize the Secretary-General’s Rights Up Front initiative, since it reaffirms the central role of human rights in the United Nations system, as well as the importance of the work of the Offices of the Special Advisers on the Prevention of Genocide and on the Responsibility to Protect, which have a vital preventive role to play.”

Lithuania

“The most recent building block of preventive action is the Rights Up Front initiative, aimed at strengthening early response and organizational preparedness in countering human rights violations, which, as we know too well, are a key early-warning sign of conflict and possible atrocities to come.”

Republic of Korea

“The Secretary-General’s calls, including the Rights Up Front initiative and the open-gate policy, have been playing a catalysing role to boost the moral authority and operational reach of the United Nations. However, there are still challenges to face before we can claim that past lessons have been fully acted upon.”

Rwanda

“Those efforts range from endorsement in 2005 at the World Summit of the concept of the responsibility to protect; the enhancement of the agenda on the protection of civilians through normative frameworks; the creation of the Office of the Special Adviser on the Prevention of Genocide; and, in relation to the responsibility to protect, the implementation of the Rights Up Front action plan as a tool for the United Nations to improve prevention by instituting a due diligence policy on human rights to help enforce United Nations purposes and principles as set out in the Charter.”

Use of the Veto in Mass Atrocity Situations

H.E. Mr. Colin Keating

“Against this background, all Council members will appreciate the political difficulties for those of us who were arguing for a reinforcement of UNAMIR. To reinforce UNAMIR required a new formal decision, but it was absolutely clear from the negotiations that a draft resolution to strengthen the force would meet with a veto.”

Australia

“The Council must now act to respond to the mass atrocities being committed in Syria, including the systematic and widespread torture and deliberate targeting of civilians by the regime as part of its military strategy. The referral of the situation to the International Criminal Court is long overdue. In that context, France’s proposal for permanent members to voluntarily renounce their veto powers in cases of mass atrocity crimes is very welcome. It should be supported and we should give it serious consideration.”

Chile

“In conclusion, Chile wishes to reiterate the appeal we launched at the General Assembly for countries that have the veto power to refrain from using it in cases of crimes against humanity, war crimes, genocide or ethnic cleansing, since that detracts from the effectiveness of the Council in upholding the most fundamental values and principles of humanity. We urge the Security Council, in particular its permanent members, to shoulder that responsibility. Let us not forget the failures of recent years and the complex situations facing us today. May we not act too late.”

France

“Tragic situations arise despite early warning and preventive action. Crimes against humanity or war crimes are perpetrated before our very eyes, while the Security Council remains paralysed by the abusive use of the veto. That is why France is working for a voluntary code of conduct for the five permanent members to limit the use of the veto when such crimes are committed. We owe that in particular to the Syrian people.”