Koruma Sorumluluğu Üzerine Bir Değerlendirme: BM’nin 2013 Tarihli Orta Afrika Cumhuriyeti Müdahalesi

Abstract

Westphalia Barışı ile kurulan ve devletlerin egemen eşitliğini esas alan uluslararası sistem, özellikle İkinci Dünya Savaşı sonrasında yaşanan kitlesel insan hakları ihlalleriyle birlikte dönüşüme uğramıştır. Saldırı suçu, savaş suçları ve insanlığa karşı suçların uluslararası suç olarak kabul edilmesi, devletlerin mutlak egemenliği anlayışını tartışmaya açmış; daha önce iç mesele olarak görülen alanlarda uluslararası sorumluluk fikri güç kazanmıştır. Bu dönüşüm sürecinde Soğuk Savaş sonrası süreçte gündeme gelen insani müdahale kavramı, kavramsal ve uygulamaya ilişkin eleştiriler nedeniyle yetersiz görülmüş ve yerini “Koruma Sorumluluğu” (Responsibility to Protect) anlayışına bırakmıştır. Koruma sorumluluğu, yalnızca askerî müdahaleyi değil; krizlerin ortaya çıkmasını önleyici tedbirleri, kriz anında askerî olmayan ve askerî araçları ve müdahale sonrası yeniden inşa süreçlerini kapsayan bütüncül bir çerçeve sunmaktadır. Bu kapsamda öncelikli sorumluluk egemen devlete ait olmakla birlikte, devletin yetersiz kaldığı veya isteksiz olduğu durumlarda uluslararası toplumun sorumluluğu gündeme gelmektedir. Bu makale, koruma sorumluluğu kavramının insani felaketlere çözüm üretme kapasitesini, Orta Afrika Cumhuriyeti örneği üzerinden ele almaktadır. Literatürde sıklıkla Libya ve Darfur gibi örneklere odaklanılmasına karşın, Orta Afrika Cumhuriyeti’ndeki (OAC) müdahalenin sınırlı etkisi büyük ölçüde göz ardı edilmektedir. Çalışmada Birleşmiş Milletler kararları, uluslararası raporlar ve insan hakları kuruluşlarının verileri karşılaştırmalı olarak analiz edilerek, koruma sorumluluğu kavramının uygulamadaki etkinliği sorgulanmaktadır. Bu hususta özellikle insani krizlere dair veri analizi yapabilecek uluslararası kuruluş eksikliği, uluslararası toplumun çıkar odağının uzağında yer alan OAC’daki sürece müdahil olmadaki isteksizliği, görevlendirilen misyonun gerekli askeri, mali ve teknik yeterlilikten yoksun bırakılması gibi hususlara dikkat çekilecektir.

Keywords

• Koruma Sorumluluğu
• İnsani Müdahale
• Orta Afrika Cumhuriyeti
• MINUSCA
• Barış Gücü

An Assessment of the Responsibility to Protect: The UN's 2013 Intervention in the Central African Republic

Abstract

The international system established by the Peace of Westphalia, based on the principle of the sovereign equality of states, underwent a transformation, particularly in the wake of the mass human rights violations that occurred after the Second World War. The recognition of the crime of aggression, war crimes, and crimes against humanity as international crimes opened up the concept of the absolute sovereignty of states to debate; the idea of international responsibility gained strength in areas previously considered internal matters. During this transformation process, the concept of humanitarian intervention, which came to the fore in the post-Cold War era, was deemed insufficient due to conceptual and practical criticisms and was replaced by the concept of the responsibility to protect offers a comprehensive framework that encompasses not only military intervention but also measures to prevent crises from arising, non-military and military tools during crises, and post-intervention reconstruction processes. In this context, while the primary responsibility lies with the sovereign state, the responsibility of the international community comes to the fore when the state is unable or unwilling to act. This article examines the capacity of the concept of the responsibility to protect to produce solutions to humanitarian disasters, using the example of the Central African Republic. Although the literature often focuses on examples such as Libya and Darfur, the limited impact of the intervention in the Central African Republic is largely overlooked. The study analyzes United Nations resolutions, international reports, and data from human rights organizations in a comparative manner, questioning the effectiveness of the concept of the responsibility to protect in practice. In this regard, attention will be drawn to issues such as the lack of international organizations capable of conducting data analysis on humanitarian crises, the reluctance of the international community to intervene in the OAC process, which is far from its focus of interest, and the failure to provide the assigned mission with the necessary military, financial, and technical capabilities.

Keywords

• Responsibility to Protect
• Humanitarian Intervention
• Central African Republic
• MINUSCA
• Peaceforcing

References

1. African Arguments, “Central African Republic: peace talks without the talks”, 15 Mayıs 2013, Erişim Tarihi 07 Ocak 2026.
2. African Union Security and Peace Counsil, 385st Meeting, 19 Temmuz 2013, Erişim Tarihi 15 Nisan 2025.
3. Anadolu Ajansı, “Gazze’de son 24 saatte 18 kişi açlıktan hayatını kaybetti”, 21 Temmuz 2025, Erişim Tarihi 21 Temmuz 2025.
4. African Arguments, “Why is the African Union still failing its people on peace and security? - By Martin Plaut”, 9 Ağustos 2014, Erişim Tarihi 07 Ocak 2026.
5. Alunaza SD. H ve Sherin V, ‘The Failure of MINUSCA as Peacekeeping Force in the Central African Republic (CAR) in 2013-2015’, (2015) 4(2) Journal Social Politic 1-17.
6. Amnesty International Publications, Central African Republic: Human Rights Crisis Spiralling Out of Control,Country of Origin Research and Information, CORI Country Report Central African Republic, Ekim 2013.
7. Amnesty International, Ethnic ctober and Sectarian Killing in The Central African Republic, 2014.
8. B. Lillich R, ‘Sovereignty and Humanity: Can They Converge?’ iç Atle Grahl- Madsen ve Jiri TomanBerlin (edr), The Spirit of Uppsala, (De Gruyter 1984).

9. Boutros-Ghali B, An Agenda for Peace: Preventive Diplomacy, Peacemaking, and Peacekeeping, 1992.
10. Brunnée J ve Toope S, ‘The Responsibility to Protect and the Use of Force: Building Legality?’ (2010) 2 (3) Global Responsibility to Protect 1-18.
11. Cater C ve M. Malone D, ‘The Genesis of R2P: Kofi Anan’s Intervention Dilemma’ R2P’ iç Alex J. Bellamly ve Timothy Dunne (edr), The Oxford Handbook of the Responsibility to Protect (Oxford University Press 2016).
12. International Crisis Group, Central African Republic: Anatomy of a Phantom State, Africa Report No. 136, 2010.
13. China Daily, ‘Xinjiang doubles terror fight budget’, 17 Ağustos 2014. Erişim Tarihi 04 Mart 2025.
14. Conciliation Resources, “Central African Republic: Peace talks without talks. A new model of perpetuating violent conflicts?”, 10 Mart 2013, Erişim Tarihi 18 Haziran 2025.
15. C. Davis M, Dietrich W ve Scholdan B, International Intervention in the Post-Cold War World: Moral Responsibility and Power Politics, (Routledge 2004).
16. Chandler D, ‘R2P or Not R2P? More Statebuilding, Less Responsibility’ (2010) 2(1) Global Responsibility to Protect 161-165.
17. Egypt. (2005). Statement on the report of the Secretary-General (A/59/2005) (UN Record Symbol: A/59/PV.86). 59th session, 86th plenary meeting, 6 April, United Nations General Assembly, New York.
18. Evans G, ‘From Humanitarian Intervention to Responsibility to Protect’ (2006) 24 (3) Wisconsin International Law Journal 703-722.
19. Evans G, The Responsibility to Protect (Brookings Institution 2008).
20. Evans G, ‘The Responsibility to Protect: Ending Mass Atrocity Crimes Once and for All (2009) 20 Irish Studies in International Affairs 7-13.
21. Evans G, Sahnoun M, ‘The Responsibility to Protect’ (2002) 81(6) Council on Foreign Relations 99-110.
22. France 24, “UN warns Central African Republic at risk of ‘genocide’”, 02 Kasım 2013, Erişim Tarihi 15 Nisan 2025.
23. General Assembly, 2005 World Summit Outcome, Resolution adopted by the General Assembly on 16 Eylül 2005.
24. Glanville L, ‘In Defense of the Responsibility to Protect’ (2013) 41(1) Journal of Religious Ethics 39-67.
25. Heiskanen J, ‘In the Shadow of Genocide: Ethnocide, Ethnic Cleansing, and International Order’, (2021) 1 (4) Global Studies Quarterly 1-10.
26. Hobson C, ‘The Moral Untouchability of the Responsibility to Protect’, (2022) 16(3) Journal of Intervention and Statebuilding 368-385.
27. Innocent Solodi-Ouiabanga B, ‘Civilians Protection by United Nations Peacekeeping Operations: Case Study of MINUSCA from 2014 to 2019’, (2014) (11) Open Access Library Journal 1-21.
28. Institue for Global Change, “What Is the Seleka?”, 29 Ağustos 2015, Erişim Tarihi 08 Ocak 2026.
29. International Court of Justice, Case Cooncerning Application of the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, 26 Şubat 2007.
30. International Criminal Court, “Prosecutor’s statement in relation to situation in Central African Republic”, 7 Ağustos 2013, Erişim Tarihi 15 Nisan 2025.
31. International Criminal Court, Situation in the Central African Republic II, Article 53(1) Report.
32. UN Security Council Resolution, 2088, 24 Ocak 2013.
33. Iran. (2005). Statement by Ambassador Zarif on the report of the Secretary-General (A/59/2005). UN Record Symbol: A/59/PV.87. 59th session, 87th plenary meeting, 7 April. United Nations General Assembly, New York.
34. Karamık İ, ‘Three Evils’ of Xinjiang: Suppression, Violent Separatism and R2P’, iç Pinar Gözen Ercan (edr), The Responsibility to Protect Twenty Years On: Rhetoric and Implementation (Springer International Publishing 2022) 245-271.
35. Lizak W, ‘The Central African Republic as a Fragile (Failed) State’, 2016 52(2) Stosunki Międzynarodowe - International Relations 179-193.
36. M. Deng F, Kimaro S ve Lyons T, Sovereignty as Responsibility: Conflict Management in Africa (Brookings Institution 1996).
37. Mohapatra N ve S Prabhu S, ‘Sovereignty and Humanitarian Intervention’ (2015) 76(2) The Indian Journal of Political Science 195-200.
38. Moses J, ‘Gaza and the Political and Moral Failure of the Responsibility to Protect’, (2024) 18(2) Journal of Intervention and Statebuilding 211-215.
39. Mutinda E ve Manthi J, ‘Protracted Conflicts and Peacekeeping Strategy: Assessing the United Nations’ Role in the Central African Republic’, (2025) 8(1) Jumuga Journal of Education, Oral Studies, and Human Sciences (JJEOSHS) 1-8.
40. Lieblich E, ‘Wars of Recovery’ (2023) 34(2) The European Journal of International Law 349-381.
41. Kofi A. Annan, “We The Peoples” The Role of United Nations in the 21st Century (2000), UN Department of Public Information.
42. Newman M, ‘Revisiting the ‘Responsibility to Protect’ (2009) 80(1) The Political Quarterly 317-337.
43. Pakistan. (2005), Statement on the report of the Secretary-General (A/59/2005). UN Record Symbol: A/59/PV.86. 59th session, 86th plenary meeting, 6 April. United Nations Assembly, New York.
44. Thakur R, ‘A Shared Responsibility for a More Secure World’, (2005) 11(3) Global Governance: A Review of Multilateralism and International Organizations 281-289.
45. The Report of the High-Level Mission in Darfur. PSC/PR/Comm. (XVII). Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
46. The Responsibility to Protect: The Report of the International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty (ICISS Report), 2001.
47. Reinold T, ‘The Responsibility to Protect - Much Ado about Nothing?’ (2010) (36) Review of International Studies 55-78.
48. Serrano M, ‘Implementing the Responsibility to Protect: The Power of R2P Talk’, (2010) 2(1) Global Responsibility to Protect 167-177.
49. Resolution 2009 (2011) Adopted by the Security Council at its 6620th meeting, on 16 September 2011.
50. Resolution 1973 (2011) Adopted by the Security Council at its 6498th meeting, on 17 March 2011.
51. Selin Kul, ‘Libya and Syria: The Protection of Refugees and R2P’, iç Pinar Gözen Ercan (edr), The Responsibility to Protect Twenty Years On: Rhetoric and Implementation (Springer International Publishing 2022) 136.
52. Reuters, “UN says almost all Muslims have fled Central African Capital”, 7 Mart 2014, Erişim Tarihi 21 Mart 2025.
53. United Nations Human Rights Office of the High Commissioner, OHCHR Assessment of Human Rights Concerns in the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region, People’s Republic of China (OHRC 31 August 2022)
54. UN Human Rights Council, ‘Report of the Independent International Fact-Finding Mission on Myanmar, a/Hrc/39/64’, 2018.
55. UNHRC, Central African Republic 2025 Situation Overview Erişim Tarihi 07.01.2026.
56. Uddin Md Zahed I, ‘Responsibility to Protect? The International Community’s Failure to Protect the Rohingya’ (2021) 52(4), Asian Affairs 934-957.
57. UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, “Humanitarian Situation Update #351 | Gaza Strip”, 30 Aralık 2025, Erişim Tarihi 7 Ocak 2025.
58. United Nations Secretary-General. (2009). Implementing the Responsibility to Protect. Report of the Secretary-General, A/63/677.
59. United Nations Peacemaker, “Accord politique de Libreville sur la résolution de la crise politico-sécuritaire en République Centrafricaine”, 11 Ocak 2013, Erişim Tarihi 7 Ocak 2026.
60. UNHRC Position on Returns to The Central Afrikan Republic, Nisan 2013.
61. UN Human Rights Council, Situation of human rights in the Central African Republic: Report of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, 12 Eylül 2013, Erişim Tarihi 20 Şubat 2025.
62. United Human Right Council Reports, Erişim Tarihi 15 Nisan 2025.
63. UN Security Council Resolution 2121 (2013) UN Doc S/RES/2121.
64. UN Security Council Resolution 2127 (2013) UN Doc S/RES/2127.
65. UN Security Council Resolution 2149 (2014) UN Doc S/RES/2149.
66. Stein E, ‘The United Nations and the Enforcement of Peace’, (1989) 10(1) Michigan Journal of Interbational Law (1989) 304-316.
67. United Nations Security Council, Report of the Secretary-General on the Central African Republic submitted pursuant to paragraph 22 of Security Council resolution 2121 (2013).
68. UN Security Council, 7128th meeting (6 March 2014) UN Doc S/PV.7128.
69. UN Security Council 6971. meeting (29 May 2013) UN Doc S/PV.6971.
70. Human Right Watch, “The Central African Republic facing its R2P moment of truth”, 20 Aralık 2013, Erişim Tarihi 07 Ocak 2026.
71. UN Security Council (2019) Report of Secretary-General on the Situation in Central African Republic, 17 Haziran 2019, S/2019/822.
72. Vincent N, Huang feng Zhi N, ‘A Comparative Study of the Sino-African Civil Wars and Its Peaceful Settlements: A Case Study of the Central African Republic’, (2021) 25(1) Technium Social Sciences Journal 639-652.
73. The European Institute International Relations, “UN and its peacekeepers remaining unwelcome in Central Africa”, 5 Temmuz 2022, Erişim Tarihi 26 Haziran 2025.
74. Vice, “UN peacekeepers are struggling to prevent all-out war in CAR”, https://www.vice.com/en/article/un-peacekeepers-war-in-car Erişim Tarihi 26 Haziran 2025.
75. Voa News, “UN Considers Options in Central African Republic”, 25 Kasım 2013, Erişim Tarihi 09 Ocak 2026.