In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

225 Globalization New Challenges CORNELIO SOMMARUGA At a time when the information revolution has largely freed economics from the reins of politics, when globalization has indeed brought economic growth and liberated innovation, there is a need to also globalize responsibility.The state is being undermined by the assertion of so many different identities. Globalizing responsibility implies, I believe, the improvement of human security , that is, the security of individual persons—their physical safety, their economic and social well-being, respect for their dignity and worth as human beings, and the respect of human rights and fundamental freedoms, namely, those of religious choice. There is a growing recognition worldwide that the concept of security must include people as well as states. This is particularly evident after the dreadful terrorist attacks on New York and Washington and the events that have followed September 11, 2001. The interrelated challenges to human security and peace require an international multilateral response of the whole world system, and this calls for increased cooperation between international organizations with enhanced authority for the UN. Security can be obtained only on the basis of a just and sustainable world order. International cooperation must also include a strong, well-respected judicial element like the International Criminal Court. No country, whether large or small, can protect itself from global threats by itself. Let me insist that attacking only the symptoms of terrorism will address neither its systematic nature nor its underlying causes. The most effective response is to establish universal good governance and secure human rights for all. Civil liberties , the rule of law, must be respected in any response to terrorism and such responsemeasuresmustalwaysconformtointernationallaw ,especiallyinternational humanitarian law. I also strongly believe that globalizing responsibility implies a responsibility to protect and, as the International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty (ICISS) has firmly stated, the responsibility to protect includes the accompanying responsibility to prevent. It is more than high time for the international community to be doing more to close the gap between rhetorical support for prevention and tangible commitment. Yes indeed, the prevention of conflicts and other forms of manmade catastrophes is first the responsibility of From the EPIIC Symposium at Tufts University, “Sovereignty and Intervention,” February 2003, roughly one month before the March 20, 2003, U.S. invasion of Iraq. 226 SHAPING A NEW WORLD sovereign states and the communities and institutions within them. A firmer national commitment to insuring fair treatment and fair opportunities for all citizens provides a solid basis for conflict prevention. Efforts to insure accountability and good governance, to promote social and economic development, and to insure a fair distribution of resources are also part of conflict prevention, as are the containment of corruption and of small arms and light weapons transfers and humanitarian demining programs. An important aspect of the ICISS report about the so-called right of humanitarian intervention is the determined shift in focus to the responsibility to protect. We have wished to avoid ambiguities, to prevent the possible militarization of humanitarian action, and particularly with a responsibility to protect, to be closer to victims. We also wanted to make clear that the humanitarian objective cannot be used as a shield for operations that have other objectives. It also permitted the development of principles for military intervention while requesting that less intrusive and coercive measures be conceded before such an intervention. The just cause was defined in a very restrictive way, mentioning, on one side, large-scale loss of life, and, on the other side, large-scale ethnic cleansing. There are four major precautionary principles: the right intention, the last resort, proportional means, and reasonable prospect. The commission also spent some space to indicate the right authority. There is no better or no more appropriate body than the UN Security Council to authorize interventions for the purpose of human protection, and in the ICISS report, we tried to show how to make the Security Council work better. Let me, however, insist on the necessity for action by the Security Council in cases where, in a conscience-shocking situation, the responsibility to protect appears evident. Should the Security Council not act, individual states may conduct a military intervention without the constraint and discipline that would be inherent in a UN authorization. Inaction by the Security Council followed by an armed intervention by a coalition of the willing that would appear to be legitimate, while illegal, would have serious negative consequences for the UN as an organization. It is, finally...

Share