The Americas 

I. Latin America & the Caribbean

a. Regional Bodies

b. Civil Society in the Region

II. North America

a. RtoP at the National Level

b. Civil Society in the Region

Throughout much of the 20th century, Latin American and Caribbean states witnessed broad political transitions, economic instability and fierce repression. Massive human rights violations occurred throughout the continent. The issues that evolved in light of the Dirty War in Argentina, the Pinochet dictatorship in Chile, the series of military governments in Guatemala, the Peruvian insurrection launched by the Sendero Luminoso group, and many other instances of human rights violations have placed the Latin American continent in the spotlight. However, in recent decades there has been a clear decrease of internal conflicts and threats to human rights, in part due to efforts by civil society to remember and condemn rights violations and crimes. Furthermore, Latin American and Caribbean countries have been strong advocates of the principles of non-intervention, self-determination, and state sovereignty. The drastic decline in rights abuses and the embracing of such principles had led advocates to question why RtoP is relevant in Latin America and the Caribbean

While many in the region strongly consider RtoP to be a military interventionist charter and yet another expression of Western or U.S. hegemony, initial proponents of RtoP at the UN were originally from Latin America, and a growing group of countries have since supported the norm.  Despite the gradual increase in regional support for RtoP there remain no provisions in regional mechanisms which address responses to cases of genocide, ethnic cleansing, war crimes and crimes against humanity.

 

The following bodies have existing mandates to promote peace processes and the defense of human rights, an avenue where RtoP-related work, especially preventive, can be advanced:

 

The Charter of Civil Society for the Caribbean Community includes provisions on human rights, such as political, women’s and children’s rights, however the document does not establish a monitoring or investigative mechanism for implementation.

 

The Organization of American States (OAS)
The human rights protection system of the OAS includes the Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR) and the Inter-American Court of Human Rights. Both organs were established through the 1969 American Convention on Human Rights which declares the economic, social, political and civil rights guaranteed to all persons within OAS Member States. The IACHR was founded to promote the observance and protection of human rights in the region and to act as a consultative body for the OAS on related matters. The Court acts as an autonomous judicial body whose purpose is to apply and interpret the American Convention on Human Rights.  Other relevant bodies in the OAS include the Committee on Juridical and Political Affairs which promotes human rights and international humanitarian law, the Inter-American Commission on Women which promotes women’s rights, the Inter-American Institute of Human Rights which is a center for teaching, research and promotion of human rights, and the Central American Integration System which promotes peace and human rights in Central America. 

 

The various bodies discussed above include, in theory, mechanisms that should enable regional contribution to RtoP; however, as Bertrand Ramcharan states in his paper Enhancing the Responsibility to Protect in Latin America and the Caribbean published through the Stanley Foundation, “there are few existing instrumentalities that are specifically mandated to act preventively in response” to mass atrocity crimes. The primary focus of both the Inter-American Commission and Court is to dispense justice after human rights violations have been committed as opposed to applying preventive or reactive measures. As a measure to strengthen their ability to protect populations from genocide, ethnic cleansing, war crimes, and crimes against humanity, the regional organizations need to further develop their prevention mechanisms and enhance the power of the bodies that currently exist.

Central American Integration System (SICA)
This mechanism includes three separate organs: the Central American Court of Justice (CCJ), the Central American Parliament (PARLACEN) and the Secretariat General of the Central American Integration system. The structure of the institution includes the representation of civil society.

Union of South American Nations (UNASUR)
UNASUR is a new economic and political intergovernmental union integrating all twelve South American countries, as part of a continuing process of South American integration. It aims at eliminating socio-economic inequalities in the region, promoting social inclusion and strengthen democracy through means such as political dialogue and social policies. 

Conference of Central American Armed Forces (CFAC)
Conference of the Central American Armed Forces (CFAC) is a regional security and defense body which can warn international organizations about deteriorating situations in Central America.
 

 
There is a need to articulate a strategy to further awareness and endorsement of RtoP by Latin American governments and institutions. Groups with RtoP-related mandates still need to consolidate their efforts to target national endorsement in countries already supportive of the norm (i.e. those most supportive of RtoP at the World Summit: Argentina, Chile, Guatemala and Mexico). Increasing civil society involvement in conflict prevention and in building a culture of dialogue, negotiation and trust with regional mechanisms also remains a priority for many groups.  

 

Below please find reports and statements by civil society, and information on forums, roundtables, and conferences held on RtoP, prevention and operationalizing civilian components in regional bodies.

 

•The Caribbean Studies Association held a conference entitled Building a New House: Towards New Caribbean Futures in an Age of Uncertainty from 30 May-3 June 2011. The conference included a panel on RtoP, with discussants examining topics such as regional prevention mechanisms and civil society, and the normative evolution of RtoP.

 

•The United States Institute of Peace hosted a course on Conflict Prevention in Latin America from 23-27 May 2011. The course focused on how to anticipate and prevent violent conflict, with specific attention on security threats in Latin America.

 

•The Stanley Foundation convened a conference on 11 May 2011 which focused on the theme, The Role of Regional and Sub-Regional Arrangements in Strengthening the Responsibility to Protect. The conference report published on 25 May 2011 included a paper by Bertrand G. Ramcharan entitled Enhancing the Responsibility to Protect in Latin America and the Caribbean. The paper analyzes the existing mechanisms related to RtoP in the region and provides recommendations on how to enhance implementation of the norm.

 

•Erasmo Lara Peña, director of the Centro Domincano para la Paz, released La Responsabildad de Proteger on 3 June 2010. (Spanish only)

 

•ICRtoP and Coordinadora Regional de Investigaciones Econmicas y Sociales organized a regional meeting in Panama on 12 March 2010 entitled Responsibildad de Proteger, Multilaterlismo y Sociedad Civl en America Latina y el Caribe. (Spanish only)

 

•The EastWest Institute held a Roundtable on Conflict Prevention in Latin America and the Caribbean on 7 July 2009 in Brussels. The seminar brought together diplomats from Latin America and the Caribbean, the Council of the European Union, and members of civil society and academia. The event fostered dialogue on the existing frameworks for prevention and opportunities for facing current challenges. The Institute released an event report upon completion of the roundtable.
 

•The Global Centre for the Responsibility to Protect held a Regional Forum on RtoP in Mexico City from 26-27 February 2009. The forum brought together government representatives, NGOs, and academics from the region to discuss the principles and challenges of RtoP within a regional context.

 

•WFM-IGP (host of the ICRtoP Secretariat), in partnership with the Consejo Argentino de Relaciones Internacionales (CARI) and the Coordinadora Regional de Investigaciones Econmicas y Sociales (CRIES), held a roundtable in Buenos Aires on March 31-April 1, 2008 entitled Dialogue on the R2P: Latin American Perspectives.  See the outcomes of all global roundtables in our January 2009 publication Civil Society Perspectives and Recommendations for Action : here. 
 

---

II. North America

 

Canada is a strong supporter and advocate of RtoP and has been involved in the development of the norm at the national and international level. The government, particularly the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade (DFAIT) has supported and funded research initiatives in an effort to further develop the norm and aid in its implementation.  

 

The International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty was launched on 14 September 2000 with a mandate to promote a comprehensive debate on the relationship between intervention and sovereignty, with a view to fostering global political consensus on how to move from polemics towards action within the international system. The Commission was formed under the sponsorship of the government of Canada, led by the efforts of then-Minister of Foreign Affairs Lloyd Axworthy. On 18 December 2001 – after more than twelve months of world-wide research, consultation and deliberation – the Commission released its report, entitled The Responsibility to Protect.

From 2001 to the end of the Presidency of George W. Bush in 2008 the United States of America drifted away from involvement with the United Nations. The Bush era was marked by unilateralism, consumed by the ‘war on terror’ in Afghanistan and around the globe and the invasion and occupation of Iraq. With the 2009 inauguration of President Barack Obama, hopes for an American foreign policy that supports the RtoP agenda have risen. And recent developments have proven that in terms of RtoP, the Obama administration is much different than its predecessor.

 

The White House released its National Security Strategy in May 2010, which included direct references to RtoP as a measure to prevent genocide and mass atrocities around the world, and reaffirmed the US government’s endorsement of the norm. 

 

The White House National Security Council established this position in 2010 to coordinate and support the administration’s policies on genocide and mass atrocities.

 

The remarks by Susan Rice, President Obama’s appointment as Ambassador to the UN, at the International Peace Institute Vienna Seminar in June 2009 conveyed the urgency with which RtoP must be implemented and mass atrocities ended. Ambassador Rice also reminded the international community of the key principles behind RtoP, dispelling misconceptions and invalidating the defense the war in Iraq with RtoP.

 

In September 2009 the US Department of State established the Office of War Crimes Issues, led by Ambassador-at-large Stephen Rapp. The Office advises the Secretary of State directly and develops US policy responses to atrocities committed in areas of conflict.

 

On 10 June 2009 the House of Representatives passed H.R.2410 which, in Sec. 1002, directed the Secretary to report to the appropriate congressional committees regarding plans for the development of a government-wide strategy to strengthen U.S. civilian capacities for preventing genocide and mass atrocities.

 

 

•The Stanley Foundation held a conference entitled Atrocity Prevention and US National Security: Implementing the Responsibility to Protect from 14-16 October 2010 to discuss the United States government’s approach to genocide and mass atrocities and to explore steps for future development and dialogue. Participants identified several key action points to further the atrocity prevention agenda.

 

•The Canada Studies Program at the University of California – Berkeley organized and hosted a symposium entitled Canada, Humanitarian Intervention and the Responsibility to Protect on 13 November 2009. The conference explored the problem of how to protect human rights in the international community from a Canadian perspective, and examined RtoP and humanitarian intervention in the broader context of Post-Cold War humanitarian crises.

 

•In October 2009 the Council on Foreign Relations published a Special Report entitled Intervention to Stop Genocide and Mass Atrocities published by Matthew C. Waxman. The report asks if current international policies regarding the use of force are effective in preventing mass atrocities. The author calls on the US to work with allies to enhance the response mechanisms of the UN Security Council, and states that major elements of a strategy should include strong but nuanced declarations of support for the “responsibility to protect.”

 

•The Montreal Institute for Genocide and Human Rights Studies published a report entitled Mobilizing the Will to Intervene: Leadership and Action to Prevent Mass Atrocities in 2009. The report focuses on operationalizing RtoP in Canada and the US, and examines previous case studies, such as the genocide in Rwanda, to analyze state response to mass atrocities. The document provides recommendations aimed at enhancing prevention and response mechanisms to both governments and to civil society.

 

•The R2PCS Project organized a series of consultative roundtables with NGOs worldwide, and on 7 March 2008 hosted the Canada Civil Society Roundtable in Ottowa. The roundtable brought together civil society organizations to meet the following goals: 1) increase understanding of RtoP and how it applies to conflicts in the region, 2) explore how to strengthen regional and international mechanisms to support RtoP, and 3) forge partnerships with NGOs who are interested in joining in a core group in building an NGO network.

 

•The Genocide Prevention Task Force, launched in November 2007 and jointly convened by the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum, the American Academy of Diplomacy, and the U.S. Institute of Peace, released a report in December 2008 that aims to be a blueprint for genocide prevention. The report asserts that genocide is preventable and makes 34 recommendations including the strengthening of early warning mechanisms, forming international partnerships to amass political will, and strengthening international norms and institutions.