Skip Navigation



Journal of Conflict and Security Law Advance Access published online on March 18, 2009

Journal of Conflict and Security Law, doi:10.1093/jcsl/krn026
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
14/1/3    most recent
krn026v1
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Barber, R.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© Oxford University Press 2009; all rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org

The Responsibility to Protect the Survivors of Natural Disaster: Cyclone Nargis, a Case Study

Rebecca Barber*

* Masters Candidate, faculty of law, University of Melbourne. With thanks to Bruce Oswald, University of Melbourne, for helpful discussion during the course of writing this paper.


   Abstract

Cyclone Nargis struck Myanmar on 2 and 3 May 2008, devastating the Irrawaddy Delta, affecting 2.4 million people and leaving an estimated 130,000 people dead or missing. In the weeks following the disaster, in the face of enormous humanitarian needs, the government of Myanmar imposed significant restrictions on the delivery of humanitarian aid. The restrictions imposed, and the frustration felt by the international community, led to intense debate regarding the potential application of the ‘responsibility to protect’, and to suggestions that the legal doctrine could be invoked to justify military intervention for the purpose of delivering humanitarian aid to the survivors of the cyclone.

Using Cyclone Nargis as a case study, this article examines the meaning of ‘responsibility to protect’ in the aftermath of natural disaster. The status of humanitarian intervention and the ‘responsibility to protect’ in customary international law is discussed, followed by a consideration of whether the ‘responsibility to protect’ could have been invoked in the aftermath of Cyclone Nargis as a justification for military intervention. This article concludes that while the restrictions imposed by the government of Myanmar fell short of what would be required to justify military intervention, it is possible to envisage situations where, in the aftermath of natural disaster, a government's refusal to allow access to survivors might be so complete, and the humanitarian needs so immense, that the use of force may be warranted.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.