On March 15, the Global Centre for the Responsibility to Protect released its latest bimonthly bulletin. In 14 issues of R2P Monitor produced to date, it profiles states within three categories: current crisis, imminent risk, and serious concern. Four countries are now at the top level of current crisis: Syria, Central African Republic, Sudan, and South Sudan. Three are one tier below at the intermediate level of imminent risk: Democratic Republic of the Congo, Myanmar, and Nigeria. By this measure, Myanmar is one of the seven most troubling states in the world.
Imminent risk is defined as follows: “The situation is reaching a critical threshold and the risk of mass atrocity crimes occurring in the immediate future is very high if effective preventive action is not taken.” The evaluation of Myanmar is straightforward: “The government of Burma/Myanmar is failing to uphold its Responsibility to Protect.” To support this judgment, GCR2P cites evidence relating primarily to the situation in Rakhine State, as well as to anti-Muslim violence in other parts of the country and ethnic conflict in peripheral areas.
The global R2P norm, unanimously adopted by member states at the 2005 UN World Summit, focuses on four mass atrocity crimes: genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing, and crimes against humanity. Pillar 1 vests in states the responsibility to protect their populations from these crimes. Pillar 2 entrusts the international community with the responsibility to encourage and assist states to meet their Pillar 1 responsibility. Pillar 3 confers on the international community the responsibility to take timely and decisive action should any state be unable or unwilling to fulfill its Pillar 1 responsibility.
GCR2P calls on the Myanmar government to deliver on its Pillar 1 responsibility by ending endemic discrimination against Rohingyas, facilitating the safe voluntary return of internally displaced persons to their communities, allowing unhindered humanitarian access throughout the country, engaging in constitutional reform to address the needs of ethnic minorities, and creating an independent judiciary. It advises the international community to urge the government to develop a comprehensive plan for inclusive national reconciliation.
It’s not clear how this long list of demands relates to the four mass atrocity crimes. Better, I think, is the UN Special Rapporteur’s sharper contention that crimes against humanity may have been committed in Rakhine State. To remind both the Myanmar government and the international community of commitments made at the World Summit nearly a decade ago, GCR2P does not need to reach beyond this.
Moreover, whilst that reminder is timely, it’s not going to cut much ice with either the government or many (probably most) of the people of Myanmar if simply uploaded to the internet from New York’s Fifth Avenue. For GCR2P to have a positive impact, it has to develop a robust strategy for local engagement. Absent that, its chance of being part of the solution inside the country can charitably be put at zero.