234
and considers the extent to which these are present or absent in the instance of the
GPE. This is a preliminary analysis intended to determine whether more in depth
research is merited.
4 A Preliminary Comparison
4.1 A Crisis vs What Crisis?
The timing of R2P was critical and it was clearly intended to respond to international humanitarian crises. The horrors of Rwanda and Srebrenica, together with the
muddled and dangerously self-serving intervention of the United Kingdom in
Kosovo, resulting in NATO air strikes (Evans 2015) were shaking the international
community. During this period the understanding of collective and national security
was moving towards human security and recognition that states themselves could
represent the largest threat to individuals within states (Thakur 2011).
In contrast, the GPE is strangely silent on the urgency, scale and underlying
causes of the massive complex global ecological crisis confronting us. The Preamble
references growing environmental threats, the urgency of action on climate change
and unprecedented biodiversity loss. However, the articles mostly lapse into a shallow anthropocentric framing of ‘environmental harm’, with the environment being
an ambient consideration rather than foundational for all life. The GPE does not
convey an intention to urgently address the existential risk for life nor does it speak
to the Greta Thunbergs of this world or the peoples, nations and ecosystems already
suffering. This had an impact on OEWG consultations with an NGO representative
and Guyana noting the lack of ambition, urgency and credibility. As a result, the
Pact would make little contribution to the current trajectory of ecological degradation. The US, Saudi Arabia and others opposed wording ‘swift action is needed’ to
address environmental challenges (ENB 2019c). This may change in the future evidenced by a key actor’s comment that we need law responsive to the anger of today’s
youth (Tigre 2019).
4.2 Insiders vs Outsiders
The pathway towards R2P was primarily initiated by UNSG Kofi Annan. As quoted
above, his 2000 Millennium Report challenged the international community to
respond to humanitarian crises. The doctrine then had a gestation period within the
international community (but outside the UN), lead initially by an independent
expert commission. The commission’s role is considered below. The gestation
period was carefully managed by Annan and his successor (Ban Ki Moon). The
process is summarised by Annan: “I couldn’t have done it inside. It would have been
very divisive. And the member states were very uncomfortable because, as an
P. Taylor
and considers the extent to which these are present or absent in the instance of the
GPE. This is a preliminary analysis intended to determine whether more in depth
research is merited.
4 A Preliminary Comparison
4.1 A Crisis vs What Crisis?
The timing of R2P was critical and it was clearly intended to respond to international humanitarian crises. The horrors of Rwanda and Srebrenica, together with the
muddled and dangerously self-serving intervention of the United Kingdom in
Kosovo, resulting in NATO air strikes (Evans 2015) were shaking the international
community. During this period the understanding of collective and national security
was moving towards human security and recognition that states themselves could
represent the largest threat to individuals within states (Thakur 2011).
In contrast, the GPE is strangely silent on the urgency, scale and underlying
causes of the massive complex global ecological crisis confronting us. The Preamble
references growing environmental threats, the urgency of action on climate change
and unprecedented biodiversity loss. However, the articles mostly lapse into a shallow anthropocentric framing of ‘environmental harm’, with the environment being
an ambient consideration rather than foundational for all life. The GPE does not
convey an intention to urgently address the existential risk for life nor does it speak
to the Greta Thunbergs of this world or the peoples, nations and ecosystems already
suffering. This had an impact on OEWG consultations with an NGO representative
and Guyana noting the lack of ambition, urgency and credibility. As a result, the
Pact would make little contribution to the current trajectory of ecological degradation. The US, Saudi Arabia and others opposed wording ‘swift action is needed’ to
address environmental challenges (ENB 2019c). This may change in the future evidenced by a key actor’s comment that we need law responsive to the anger of today’s
youth (Tigre 2019).
4.2 Insiders vs Outsiders
The pathway towards R2P was primarily initiated by UNSG Kofi Annan. As quoted
above, his 2000 Millennium Report challenged the international community to
respond to humanitarian crises. The doctrine then had a gestation period within the
international community (but outside the UN), lead initially by an independent
expert commission. The commission’s role is considered below. The gestation
period was carefully managed by Annan and his successor (Ban Ki Moon). The
process is summarised by Annan: “I couldn’t have done it inside. It would have been
very divisive. And the member states were very uncomfortable because, as an
P. Taylor