The master thesis analyses and compares different approaches of selected Latin American countries towards the principle Responsibility to Protect. It also looks at the reasons for differences between their positions and at the main obstacle for the implementation of the principle, claimed by the Latin American states. Analyzed countries base their opinion on historical facts, national political guidelines and legal frameworks, commonly referring to the principles of sovereignty and non-intervention as an argument for their support or reluctance towards the Responsibility to Protect. Latin American countries have, with the exception of Cuba and Venezuela, shown growing regard for this principle and have encouraged the endorsement of its legal status in international law. The remaining disagreements and polemics are mostly concerned with the possibility of the international community to use force. The thesis pays special attention to the contribution of Brasil in the development of the principle Responsibility to Protect, to the role of national politics in shaping the position of Mexico, and to Venezuela, as a case where the possibility to use the Responsibility to Protect in practice a while ago was discussed. Although Latin America has the reputation of being a calm region with regard to interstate conflicts, it would be wise to consider whether human suffering in national contexts in any of analyzed countries, apart from Venezuela, could be classified as a situation that warrants the application of the Responsibility to Protect. Given that, apropos of the Responsibility to Protect measures, the emphasis is placed on prevention, participation of civil society and efforts to strengthen regional and national mechanisms are crucial for successful implementation of the aforementioned principle in the future.
|
