The Impact of the Discourse of the "Politics of Protection": The Case of the EU and UN Policing and Military Missions to Chad (2007-2010)
This article evaluates the disputed relationship between the doctrines of the responsibility to protect and humanitarian military intervention and their impact through a case study of the European Union and United Nations military and policing operations in Chad, EUFOR Chad, and the United Nations M...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | African security 2012-07, Vol.5 (3-4), p.179-198 |
---|---|
1. Verfasser: | |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 198 |
---|---|
container_issue | 3-4 |
container_start_page | 179 |
container_title | African security |
container_volume | 5 |
creator | Bono, Giovanna |
description | This article evaluates the disputed relationship between the doctrines of the responsibility to protect and humanitarian military intervention and their impact through a case study of the European Union and United Nations military and policing operations in Chad, EUFOR Chad, and the United Nations Mission in Central African Republic and Chad, MINURCAT. It shows that the power of the discourse of politics of protection needs to be studied carefully. This article suggests that the EUFOR mission had a negative impact on the protection dynamics of the conflict. EUFOR contributed to a worsening of the human rights and security situation, strengthened the authoritarian rule of President Déby, and promoted political irresponsibility by providing indirect backing for the Justice Equality Movement. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1080/19392206.2012.732889 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>jstor_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1283639567</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><jstor_id>48598833</jstor_id><sourcerecordid>48598833</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c395t-db08e15d7cbf5529c3c94ca8d64e00ac8f2cacf4a03fa0706ce76ae1d08ece223</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkctO3DAUhqMKpHLpG7SSxYouMhzbieN0g9AUChLQWcysLXNiF6NMPLU9qniEvjVOU2AHK5_L_9nn-C-KzxRmFCSc0Ja3jIGYMaBs1nAmZfuh2BvLJWO02nmJQXws9mN8ABCMStgr_i7vDblabzQm4i1JOfvuIvptiOa5cLTwvUsO41hYBJ8MJueHo29khOf6VXm-InroyOqWjAi64de__MZlXofHHMSYyUiSJ_N73ZFjBtCUeWz4eljsWt1H8-n_eVCsLs6X88vy-uePq_nZdYm8rVPZ3YE0tO4avLN1zVrk2FaoZScqA6BRWoYabaWBWw0NCDSN0IZ2GUPDGD8ojqd7N8H_3pqY1DovbPpeD8Zvo6INk6KuZP6xd6VMcpGnEk2WVpMUg48xGKs2wa3zzoqCGk1Szyap0SQ1mZSxLxP2EJMPL0wl61ZKznP_dOq7wfqw1n986DuV9GPvgw16QBcVf_OFJ8vkn68</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1283639567</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>The Impact of the Discourse of the "Politics of Protection": The Case of the EU and UN Policing and Military Missions to Chad (2007-2010)</title><source>Jstor Complete Legacy</source><source>Political Science Complete</source><source>PAIS Index</source><source>Worldwide Political Science Abstracts</source><creator>Bono, Giovanna</creator><creatorcontrib>Bono, Giovanna</creatorcontrib><description>This article evaluates the disputed relationship between the doctrines of the responsibility to protect and humanitarian military intervention and their impact through a case study of the European Union and United Nations military and policing operations in Chad, EUFOR Chad, and the United Nations Mission in Central African Republic and Chad, MINURCAT. It shows that the power of the discourse of politics of protection needs to be studied carefully. This article suggests that the EUFOR mission had a negative impact on the protection dynamics of the conflict. EUFOR contributed to a worsening of the human rights and security situation, strengthened the authoritarian rule of President Déby, and promoted political irresponsibility by providing indirect backing for the Justice Equality Movement.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1939-2206</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1939-2214</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1080/19392206.2012.732889</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Taylor & Francis Group</publisher><subject>Armed Forces ; Authoritarianism ; Central African Republic ; Chad ; Conflict ; Equality ; European Union ; Human Security ; Humanitarian Intervention ; humanitarian interventions ; Law enforcement ; Military Intervention ; military interventions ; Original Articles ; Presidents ; Sudan ; United Nations</subject><ispartof>African security, 2012-07, Vol.5 (3-4), p.179-198</ispartof><rights>Copyright Taylor & Francis Group, LLC 2012</rights><rights>Copyright © Taylor & Francis Group, LLC</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c395t-db08e15d7cbf5529c3c94ca8d64e00ac8f2cacf4a03fa0706ce76ae1d08ece223</citedby></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/pdf/48598833$$EPDF$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/48598833$$EHTML$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,799,27842,27901,27902,57992,58225</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Bono, Giovanna</creatorcontrib><title>The Impact of the Discourse of the "Politics of Protection": The Case of the EU and UN Policing and Military Missions to Chad (2007-2010)</title><title>African security</title><description>This article evaluates the disputed relationship between the doctrines of the responsibility to protect and humanitarian military intervention and their impact through a case study of the European Union and United Nations military and policing operations in Chad, EUFOR Chad, and the United Nations Mission in Central African Republic and Chad, MINURCAT. It shows that the power of the discourse of politics of protection needs to be studied carefully. This article suggests that the EUFOR mission had a negative impact on the protection dynamics of the conflict. EUFOR contributed to a worsening of the human rights and security situation, strengthened the authoritarian rule of President Déby, and promoted political irresponsibility by providing indirect backing for the Justice Equality Movement.</description><subject>Armed Forces</subject><subject>Authoritarianism</subject><subject>Central African Republic</subject><subject>Chad</subject><subject>Conflict</subject><subject>Equality</subject><subject>European Union</subject><subject>Human Security</subject><subject>Humanitarian Intervention</subject><subject>humanitarian interventions</subject><subject>Law enforcement</subject><subject>Military Intervention</subject><subject>military interventions</subject><subject>Original Articles</subject><subject>Presidents</subject><subject>Sudan</subject><subject>United Nations</subject><issn>1939-2206</issn><issn>1939-2214</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2012</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>7UB</sourceid><sourceid>7TQ</sourceid><recordid>eNqFkctO3DAUhqMKpHLpG7SSxYouMhzbieN0g9AUChLQWcysLXNiF6NMPLU9qniEvjVOU2AHK5_L_9nn-C-KzxRmFCSc0Ja3jIGYMaBs1nAmZfuh2BvLJWO02nmJQXws9mN8ABCMStgr_i7vDblabzQm4i1JOfvuIvptiOa5cLTwvUsO41hYBJ8MJueHo29khOf6VXm-InroyOqWjAi64de__MZlXofHHMSYyUiSJ_N73ZFjBtCUeWz4eljsWt1H8-n_eVCsLs6X88vy-uePq_nZdYm8rVPZ3YE0tO4avLN1zVrk2FaoZScqA6BRWoYabaWBWw0NCDSN0IZ2GUPDGD8ojqd7N8H_3pqY1DovbPpeD8Zvo6INk6KuZP6xd6VMcpGnEk2WVpMUg48xGKs2wa3zzoqCGk1Szyap0SQ1mZSxLxP2EJMPL0wl61ZKznP_dOq7wfqw1n986DuV9GPvgw16QBcVf_OFJ8vkn68</recordid><startdate>201207</startdate><enddate>201207</enddate><creator>Bono, Giovanna</creator><general>Taylor & Francis Group</general><general>Taylor & Francis, Ltd</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7UB</scope><scope>7TQ</scope><scope>DHY</scope><scope>DON</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201207</creationdate><title>The Impact of the Discourse of the "Politics of Protection": The Case of the EU and UN Policing and Military Missions to Chad (2007-2010)</title><author>Bono, Giovanna</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c395t-db08e15d7cbf5529c3c94ca8d64e00ac8f2cacf4a03fa0706ce76ae1d08ece223</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2012</creationdate><topic>Armed Forces</topic><topic>Authoritarianism</topic><topic>Central African Republic</topic><topic>Chad</topic><topic>Conflict</topic><topic>Equality</topic><topic>European Union</topic><topic>Human Security</topic><topic>Humanitarian Intervention</topic><topic>humanitarian interventions</topic><topic>Law enforcement</topic><topic>Military Intervention</topic><topic>military interventions</topic><topic>Original Articles</topic><topic>Presidents</topic><topic>Sudan</topic><topic>United Nations</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Bono, Giovanna</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Worldwide Political Science Abstracts</collection><collection>PAIS Index</collection><collection>PAIS International</collection><collection>PAIS International (Ovid)</collection><jtitle>African security</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Bono, Giovanna</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>The Impact of the Discourse of the "Politics of Protection": The Case of the EU and UN Policing and Military Missions to Chad (2007-2010)</atitle><jtitle>African security</jtitle><date>2012-07</date><risdate>2012</risdate><volume>5</volume><issue>3-4</issue><spage>179</spage><epage>198</epage><pages>179-198</pages><issn>1939-2206</issn><eissn>1939-2214</eissn><abstract>This article evaluates the disputed relationship between the doctrines of the responsibility to protect and humanitarian military intervention and their impact through a case study of the European Union and United Nations military and policing operations in Chad, EUFOR Chad, and the United Nations Mission in Central African Republic and Chad, MINURCAT. It shows that the power of the discourse of politics of protection needs to be studied carefully. This article suggests that the EUFOR mission had a negative impact on the protection dynamics of the conflict. EUFOR contributed to a worsening of the human rights and security situation, strengthened the authoritarian rule of President Déby, and promoted political irresponsibility by providing indirect backing for the Justice Equality Movement.</abstract><pub>Taylor & Francis Group</pub><doi>10.1080/19392206.2012.732889</doi><tpages>20</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1939-2206 |
ispartof | African security, 2012-07, Vol.5 (3-4), p.179-198 |
issn | 1939-2206 1939-2214 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1283639567 |
source | Jstor Complete Legacy; Political Science Complete; PAIS Index; Worldwide Political Science Abstracts |
subjects | Armed Forces Authoritarianism Central African Republic Chad Conflict Equality European Union Human Security Humanitarian Intervention humanitarian interventions Law enforcement Military Intervention military interventions Original Articles Presidents Sudan United Nations |
title | The Impact of the Discourse of the "Politics of Protection": The Case of the EU and UN Policing and Military Missions to Chad (2007-2010) |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-31T13%3A50%3A38IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-jstor_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=The%20Impact%20of%20the%20Discourse%20of%20the%20%22Politics%20of%20Protection%22:%20The%20Case%20of%20the%20EU%20and%20UN%20Policing%20and%20Military%20Missions%20to%20Chad%20(2007-2010)&rft.jtitle=African%20security&rft.au=Bono,%20Giovanna&rft.date=2012-07&rft.volume=5&rft.issue=3-4&rft.spage=179&rft.epage=198&rft.pages=179-198&rft.issn=1939-2206&rft.eissn=1939-2214&rft_id=info:doi/10.1080/19392206.2012.732889&rft_dat=%3Cjstor_proqu%3E48598833%3C/jstor_proqu%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1283639567&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_jstor_id=48598833&rfr_iscdi=true |