From Sudan to Syria: Locating ‘Regime Change’ in R2P and the ICC

Abstract

Recently, R2P and the ICC have been mobilised in different forms to respond to state-directed mass atrocities in Sudan, Libya and Syria. Notably, this has generated debate over the capacity and legitimacy of using R2P and the ICC to facilitate ‘regime change’ in those cases and beyond. This article critically examines where regime change, as an aim and outcome, sits within R2P and ICC doctrine and practice. We demonstrate the ambiguous position of regime change in R2P and ICC doctrine, where it is not explicitly endorsed as an objective but actions that may lead to it are permitted. In practice, R2P and the ICC have been used to starkly different ends in the three cases. Such ambiguity—about what regime change is, and about how far international intervention can legitimately go—and inconsistency in application, can undermine global support for R2P and the ICC as tools for preventing and responding to atrocities.

International Judicial Intervention in the Case of Libya: From Justice Enforcer to Peace Maker Right Constituency and Institutional Independence: Virtues of a Fight against Realpolitik

“…Otherwise, a regime change can delegitimize the targeted government "thereby potentially facilitating their exit from the national political scene in a less direct manner". 53 As the world "shamer-in-chief", the ICC brings "a kind of international opprobrium" that is without parallel in the international community. 54 Indeed, the Court's engagement in conflicts provides a form of soft power to shape international and domestic narratives.…”

The Road Not Taken: Failure to Protect from Atrocity Crimes in Myanmar

“…83 The NATO countries later argued that a leader who himself is perpetrating atrocities against civilians cannot stay in power. 84 Nevertheless, regime change was not envisaged in SC Resolution 1973 authorizing intervention and even feared by some and therefore led to global criticism among academics and States alike. 85 Concerns that Libya would establish a precedent for regime change was emphasized in the Syrian crisis.…”