How should rapid developments in digital and cyber technology shape our understanding of the Responsibility to Protect (R2P)? And in operationalising the doctrine, how might insights on the impact of technology be integrated within key tools of R2P implementation, such as the United Nations Framework of Analysis for Atrocity Crimes? Although prior literature has produced rich discussion of R2P as a norm, and of the politics surrounding it, analysts have paid ‘far less attention to what R2P looks like in practice’, especially with regard to advances in new technology. In this article we contend that, whether we look at the future of R2P through a normative/legal lens, or from a policy/operational perspective, grappling with the impact of technology on the practical realities of mass atrocity situations is of critical importance. To explore this argument, we empirically engage with one of the primary tools through which the implementation of R2P has benefited, the UN Framework of Analysis on Atrocity Crimes ( unfaac ).
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
D’Alessandra et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: