FN:s paradox: Mandatet att skydda och oförmågan att agera: En tematisk analys av kritiken som riktas mot FN:s roll och brister i förebyggandet av folkmord

Abstract

States within the United Nations (UN) has the duty, in accordance with the genocide convention, to prevent and intervene when it comes to genocide and genocidal acts. The Genocide convention is an international treaty that criminalizes acts of genocide and obligates state parties to enforce the prohibition of genocide. The crisis in the Gaza Strip, the smaller of two Palestinian territories, since October 2023, has sparked intense debate about the UN’s role in relation to the genocide convention, with accusations of the UN’s inaction, inability, and unwillingness in the face of political deadlock among the international community. The purpose of this study is to shine light on what role the criticism plays in relation to the UN’s structural processes and how it is articulated, and what role the Genocide Convention as a legal document plays in relation to atrocities in Gaza. This has been achieved through a qualitative thematic analysis by examining debate articles by the UN's General Assembly, human rights organizations, and debate articles by geopolitical experts. The theoretical frameworks, political realism and institutionalization, have helped to analyze the criticisms and the implications they have for the role of the UN, in relation to the crisis in Gaza. The results show that the criticism mostly illuminates the failure of the structural factors within the UN. This includes the failure to implement the Responsibility to Protect (R2P) R2P , the Security Council's limitations, selective justice, and the international community’s unwillingness to intervene.