International Mediation and The Responsibility to Protect

Studies on international mediation for the prevention of genocide or atrocities in the context of implementing the Responsibility to Protect (R2P) principle have argued that effectiveness hangs on coercive strategies, particularly sanctions measures. Following the coercion premise, this paper posits that judicial and military mechanisms are equally essential elements of effective coercion campaigns. Drawing on the UN doctrines of R2P and the rule of law in conflict, as well as the concepts of power, directive, and multiparty mediation in international relations, I analyse the successful cases of Kenya and Guinea. The evidence supports the proposition: success depends on complementing sanctions with judicial and military mechanisms. Significantly, these coercive instruments must be concurrently deployed to successfully influence the conflict parties’ or perpetrators’ behaviour and decision-making.