摘要
厘清保护的责任与人道主义干预的关系有助于评价和预测保护的责任概念的发展及其在实践中的运用。保护的责任与人道主义干预的一致性体现在实践与理念两个维度:实践上,二者解决相同问题,面临一致障碍,即当主权国家成为本国人民不安全的来源时,国际社会可否以及如何采取强制性行动;理念上,人道主义干预与保护的责任支柱三背后的支撑思想均为世界主义,强调在特定情境中,对"陌生人"的拯救可以突破国家主权的边界。二者在本质一致的前提下,最大的差别是保护的责任被国际社会接受。保护的责任对问题的重新框定和强调对既定国际规范的嵌入是造成差别的原因。但对比分析利比亚与叙利亚这两个案例,说明重新框定后的保护的责任并不能解决根本问题,有走向异化的趋势。
The clarification of the relationship between the responsibility to protection and humanitarian intervention helps to evaluate and predict the development of the concept of the responsibility to protection and its applications in practice. The coherence between the responsibility to protect and humanitarian intervention is embodied in the two dimensions of practice and concepts: in practice,they both address the same problem and face the same obstacle to the question of whether and how the international community can take coercive actions when a sovereign state becomes a source of insecurity for its people; conceptually,the supportive ideology behind both humanitarian intervention and the responsibility is cosmopolitanism,emphasizing that the boundaries of state sovereignty can be broken through to rescue 'strangers'in specific contexts. Premised on the similar nature of the two,the biggest difference is the responsibility to protect is accepted by the international community. The responsibility to protect redefines the issues and highlights the embedding of established international norms,leading to the difference However,a comparative analysis of the two cases,Libya and Syria,indicates that the reframed responsibility to protect cannot solve the fundamental problem; there is the trend toward alienation.
出处
《国际关系研究》
2016年第6期122-137,共16页
Journal of International Relations
关键词
保护的责任
人道主义干预
强制干预
世界主义
重新框定
responsibility to protect
humanitarian intervention
coercive intervention
cosmopolitanism
reframing
