Search

Begin New Search Topic Protection

81. Safe Journeys and Sound Policy: Expanding protected entry for refugees

Author:
Claire Higgins
Publication Date:
11-2019
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Andrew & Renata Kaldor Centre for International Refugee Law at UNSW Sydney
Abstract:
Protected entry procedures are visa mechanisms that allow individuals to apply for entry into another country for the purpose of accessing protection under international refugee or human rights law. Procedures are made available within countries of origin or first asylum, their primary function being to ensure that asylum seekers and refugees can travel safely across international borders and avoid potentially dangerous or exploitative irregular journeys. This Policy Brief draws on past and current State practice to outline what these procedures look like, and how they should operate as tools of refugee protection. It speaks to a core objective of the Global Compact on Refugees, which is to expand access to third-country solutions for refugees and asylum seekers. Forced migration is currently at record highs worldwide, but not all those who are displaced will want or need to move outside their region of origin. UNHCR has identified a relatively small number of refugees, 1.4 million people, as needing resettlement under its annual program in 2020. This means that States could make a real difference by expanding the use of protected entry procedures and other complementary pathways to increase access to protection and solutions.
Topic:
Refugees, Forced Migration, Protection, Migration Policy, and Asylum Seekers
Political Geography:
Global Focus

82. Global Peace Operations Review: 2019

Author:
Alexandra Novosseloff, Paige Arthur, and Marc Jacquand
Publication Date:
12-2019
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Global Peace Operations Review
Abstract:
After several years at a crossroads, United Nations peace operations took a definitive turn in 2019, shifting away from large, multidimensional, “conflict management” operations toward models that are smaller, more flexible, and have greater reliance on partnerships. This edition of Peace Operations Review surveys a year of reforms, the twentieth anniversary of the first protection of civilians mandate, and innovative approaches to peace operations transitions. Peace Operations Review 2019 takes stock of recent trends in peace operations. With articles from Alexandra Novosseloff, Marc Jacquand, and Paige Arthur, the review: Summarizes five key trends in peace operations, touching on the issues of UN reform, the role of the Security Council, transitions, an enhanced “spectrum” of peace operations, and resources vs. mandates Examines UNAMID’s innovative approaches to the forthcoming transition in Darfur Surveys the current state of affairs of protection of civilians mandates, with proposals for greater focus on risk management
Topic:
United Nations, Peacekeeping, Reform, UN Security Council, and Protection
Political Geography:
Sudan, Darfur, and Global Focus

83. Fighting Fire with Fire: The Growing Nexus between Atrocity Prevention and Counterterrorism and Its Implications for the Use of Force to Protect Civilians

Author:
Colin Thomas-Jensen
Publication Date:
02-2018
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Simon-Skjodt Center for the Prevention of Genocide, United States Holocaust Memorial Museum
Abstract:
By the fall of 2014, before the United States and its partners began the military campaign to erode the territory held by the self-proclaimed Islamic State (IS) in Iraq and Syria, the international community understood the horrors endured by civilians living under IS control. While IS leadership plotted politically motivated attacks against its enemies in the region and in the West, reports trickling out from areas under the group’s merciless grip and IS’s own online propaganda clearly indicated a grave pattern of war crimes and crimes against humanity, including violence targeted at ethnic and religious minorities; women; the lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender community; and other vulnerable groups. As the United States considered its response to the rise of IS, the duality of the group’s threat—an external one to Americans and American interests and an internal one to civilians living in IS-held areas—animated two communities of US policy makers that had rarely interacted with one another: those focused on counterterrorism and atrocity prevention. The US-led military operation to prevent genocide by IS against the Yazidi community on Mount Sinjar, Iraq, that President Barack Obama announced on August 7, 2014, included the first volley of airstrikes in the more-than-three-year counterterrorism campaign to defeat IS in Iraq and Syria. Important for the atrocity-prevention community, the airstrikes and deployment of Special Operations Forces (alongside humanitarian experts) to help coordinate the evacuation of civilians demonstrated an openness on the part of senior US policy makers to use counterterrorism capabilities to prevent a mass atrocity. In hindsight, however, US-led lethal action against IS fighters who threatened thousands of Yazidis trapped on Mount Sinjar was more the outcome of a unique set of circumstances than a harbinger of a more collaborative relationship between the counterterrorism community and policy makers focused on preventing atrocities committed by state actors, such as the governments of Syria, South Sudan, and Myanmar, and nonstate actors, including militia groups with little to no connection with international terrorist networks. With terrorist groups such as IS, Boko Haram in the Lake Chad Basin, and al-Shabaab in the Horn of Africa almost certain to continue atrocities against local populations in areas in which they operate, a fundamental question for policy makers arises. Did the extreme circumstances under which the United States and its partners decided to intervene on Mount Sinjar necessarily represent a threshold for action, or can a more normalized relationship between the atrocityprevention and counterterrorism communities be advanced—a relationship that would seek to leverage counterterrorism tools and resources to take decisive action to protect non-US citizens from atrocities while improving measures to avoid civilian casualties, including civilians killed during actions taken by US counterterrorism partners? Drawing from interviews with nearly 40 former and current US policy makers and outside experts1 , as well as a convening of 20 experts at the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum in June 2017, this paper explains the increasing relevance of the counterterrorism–atrocityprevention nexus and defines some of the significant challenges of closer collaboration between those communities, with a specific focus on preventing imminent atrocities. Defining when (including clearly articulated criteria for what constitutes “imminent” in this scenario), how, and under whose authority to use force to prevent atrocities against civilians is only one element of broadening a counterterrorism strategy that also includes diplomacy and countering violent extremism (CVE) efforts. 2 This paper is narrowly focused on the use of force and argues that in some circumstances, the atrocity-prevention agenda can be advanced by using counterterrorism tools—including lethal strikes—to prevent imminent atrocities against civilians in areas where terrorist groups operate.
Topic:
Counter-terrorism, Islamic State, Civilians, Atrocity Prevention, and Protection
Political Geography:
Iraq, Middle East, Global Focus, and United States of America

84. ALNAP Guide: Evaluation of Protection in Humanitarian Action

Author:
Ian Christoplos, Neil Dillon, and Francesca Bonino
Publication Date:
10-2018
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
ALNAP: Active Learning Network for Accountability and Performance
Abstract:
This companion to the ALNAP EHA Guide offers protection-specific insights for evaluators and evaluation commissioners across the humanitarian sector. It covers the planning, data management and analysis phases of evaluation and addresses a range of challenges that – whilst not all unique to protection – are often exacerbated by the contexts in which protection activities typically take place. Challenges addressed include those arising from the multi-faceted nature of protection activities, the difficulty understanding cause-effect relationships underlying protection risks, and the challenges of accessing and managing very sensitive data, sometimes drawn from communities in conflict.
Topic:
Performance Evaluation, Guidelines, Humanitarian Response, and Protection
Political Geography:
Global Focus

85. PEACE ENFORCEMENT AND THE GEOGRAPHY OF VIOLENCE AGAINST CIVILIANS

Author:
Jay Benson
Publication Date:
03-2018
Content Type:
Commentary and Analysis
Institution:
Political Violence @ A Glance
Abstract:
UN peacekeeping is facing significant challenges. The peacekeeping budget has taken significant cuts, and there are likely to be more. Yet, while resources are shrinking, peacekeeping missions are being asked to do more, particularly regarding the use of force to protect civilians. Faced with declining resources and a task as difficult as civilian protection, missions will be forced to do more with less. So how can they begin to address this challenge?
Topic:
United Nations, Counterinsurgency, Peacekeeping, Violence, Peace, Civilians, Protection, and Enforcement
Political Geography:
Africa, Democratic Republic of the Congo, and United States of America

86. MAKING EFFORTS TO IMPROVE UN PEACEKEEPING

Author:
Chiara Ruffa
Publication Date:
07-2018
Content Type:
Commentary and Analysis
Institution:
Political Violence @ A Glance
Abstract:
UN peacekeeping often works: overwhelming evidence tells us it saves lives, and—usually—keeps peace (see here, here, here, and here). Despite the successes of peacekeeping, scholars and policymakers alike continue to explore how to make peacekeeping even more effective. Several recent proposals have focused on improving procedures of the UN Security Council and mission mandates, as well as on increasing resources (as in the Cruz report’s call for “overwhelming force”). Such suggestions, however, neglect two critical facts about peacekeeping.
Topic:
United Nations, Peacekeeping, and Protection
Political Geography:
South Asia, Middle East, Kashmir, and Lebanon

87. THE UN’S DEFINING CHALLENGE: PEACEKEEPING AND PROTECTION OF CIVILIANS

Author:
Hanne Fjelde, Lisa Hultman, and Desirée Nilsson
Publication Date:
10-2018
Content Type:
Commentary and Analysis
Institution:
Political Violence @ A Glance
Abstract:
According to former UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon, protecting civilians from atrocity crimes is “a defining purpose of the United Nations in the twenty-first century”. It might also be one of the UN’s greatest challenges. Protection of civilians has become a core task of peacekeeping operations: more than 95 percent of all peacekeepers deployed globally are mandated to protect civilians. At the same time, media headlines often highlight UN failures to respond to violence in a timely manner (for example, here and here), leaving civilians without protection. Looking beyond individual cases, is the UN really unable to perform one of its core tasks and live up to its “defining purpose”? In a recently published article in International Organization, we shed some light on these issues. Using fine-grained geographical data at the sub-national level, we empirically examine both where peacekeepers are deployed and whether they are able to effectively reduce violence against civilians. In short, we find three things: 1) the UN does deploy to locations where civilians are at risk, most clearly so in areas where rebels perpetrate violence; 2) the UN is effective in protecting civilians from rebel violence, but struggles to protect civilians from government violence, and 3) peacekeeping presence does not just push violence to adjacent locations.
Topic:
United Nations, Peacekeeping, Civilians, and Protection
Political Geography:
Global Focus

88. Special humanitarian intakes: Enhancing protection through targeted refugee resettlement

Author:
Tamara Wood and Claire Higgins
Publication Date:
12-2018
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Andrew & Renata Kaldor Centre for International Refugee Law at UNSW Sydney
Abstract:
Between 2015 and 2017, Australia provided 12,000 resettlement places for refugees fleeing conflict in Syria and Iraq. This special humanitarian intake was an ad hoc, one-off response to international and domestic pressure on the Australian government and reflects similar pledges made by other States to admit Syrian refugees. While Australia’s Syria–Iraq special intake provided invaluable protection for refugees fleeing one of the world’s major humanitarian crises, it raises a number of questions regarding fairness, transparency and efficiency in its implementation. In the context of growing numbers of displaced people worldwide, the Syrian crisis will not be the last situation involving widespread displacement and requiring international cooperation to ensure the protection of refugees. Indeed, the current predicament of large numbers of refugees in places such as Kenya, Bangladesh and the Central Mediterranean also requires stronger responses and support from the international community. This Policy Brief critically analyses special humanitarian intakes from an international and comparative perspective. It examines the normative frameworks applicable to special humanitarian intakes, both in Australia and elsewhere, including international refugee and human rights law, the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) global resettlement program, and Australian domestic law. It considers how the Syria–Iraq special intake compares to other similar, one-off arrangements for the relocation and/or resettlement of refugees, such as the Comprehensive Plan of Action for Indo-Chinese refugees in the 1970s and 1980s, the humanitarian evacuation of Kosovar refugees in 1999, and the use of individual emergency and urgent resettlement quotas by States such as Sweden and Canada.
Topic:
Refugees, Displacement, Resettlement, Humanitarian Response, and Protection
Political Geography:
Global Focus

89. Protecting Syrian Civilians: The Road Not Taken

Author:
Frederic C. Hof
Publication Date:
12-2017
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Simon-Skjodt Center for the Prevention of Genocide, United States Holocaust Memorial Museum
Abstract:
During 70 months of chaos in Syria, the United States had protected not one Syrian civilian from the homicidal rampages of Bashar al-Assad and his remorseless regime. Yes, America had come militarily to the aid of Syrian Kurds besieged by ISIS (ISIL, Daesh, Islamic State). Yet the United States had protected no one in Syria from an Iranian client regime’s campaign of civilian mass homicide. The consequences were profoundly negative for Syrians, their neighbors, Western Europe, and the United States. And they were avoidable. The road taken by the Obama administration unintentionally but inevitably facilitated a humanitarian and geopolitical disaster. The road not taken would have required complicating, frustrating, slowing, and perhaps even stopping the mass murder of defenseless civilians. To be sure: it would not have been easy. But its avoidance has been catastrophic. Indeed, nothing about Syria has been easy: no silver bullets to fire, no fairy dust to sprinkle, and no magic potions to ingest. Choices between bad and worse have dominated from the beginning. They have grown starker and uglier over time largely because of the road taken.
Topic:
Islamic State, Syrian War, Civilians, Atrocities, and Protection
Political Geography:
Middle East, Syria, and United States of America

90. Allies Against Atrocities: The Imperative for Transatlantic Cooperation to Prevent and Stop Mass Killings

Author:
Lee Feinstein and Tod Lindberg
Publication Date:
03-2017
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Simon-Skjodt Center for the Prevention of Genocide, United States Holocaust Memorial Museum
Abstract:
A generation after Rwanda and Bosnia, many of the world powers who apologized for their lack of an early and effective response to genocide during the 1990s have yet to organize themselves sufficiently to act early and effectively to prevent or stop mass atrocities. The horror of Syria is Exhibit A. As responses to past atrocity crimes show, averting and halting atrocities requires a coordinated and sustained effort by local, regional, and international actors. This report argues that a multilateral response is necessary and that the transatlantic region has a critical role to play in shaping and leading these efforts. The governments of the transatlantic community—the United States, Canada, and Europe—already devote significant resources and political capital to the prevention and amelioration of crises and conflicts, as well as to the pursuit of international development agendas. Without better cooperation among themselves and their like-minded cousins, efforts to address mass atrocities will continue to be reactive, slow, and devastating to human life and potential. Individual transatlantic countries should be involved in those efforts, each bringing its unique capacities to the table. From the vantage point of the report's authors, the United States has a particularly important role to play in encouraging greater transatlantic cooperation among states on this issue. Principle Recommendations: Devise and implement coordinated transatlantic atrocity prevention efforts Internationalize atrocity prevention efforts Improve coordination of financial sanctions Develop an international legal framework adequate to the challenge of atrocity prevention Prioritize civilian protection in military responses that include peacekeeping
Topic:
International Cooperation, Sanctions, Peacekeeping, Civilians, Atrocities, Transatlantic Relations, Atrocity Prevention, and Protection
Political Geography:
Europe, Canada, North America, and United States of America