@article{oai:serve.repo.nii.ac.jp:00003764,
 author = {西海, 洋志 and Hiroshi, Nishikai},
 issue = {第2号},
 journal = {聖学院大学論叢, The Journal of Seigakuin University},
 month = {Mar},
 note = {本稿は，保護する責任（R2P）概念の展開上，一つの画期である2005年世界サミット（WS）の成果とその意味を再検討する。近年のR2P概念をめぐる議論の錯綜は，WSの過大／過小評価に一因があるからである。本稿では，まず，過大評価を見直すため，WS前後の展開を詳察し，WS成果文書はR2P概念に消極的な国々を中心とした合意であったことを明らかにする。次に，国連事務局の役割に着目し，WS前後の展開を再検討することで，過小評価に異議を呈する。本稿の分析・考察から，WSを契機に，国連事務局がR2P推進の中心的な主体となってきたこと，また，R2P推進の主軸が「介入論」から「紛争予防論」に移されたことで，R2Pの制度化に一定の進展が見られることを明らかにする。, This article re-examines the outcomes and meanings of the 2005 United Nations World Summit (WS): an epochal event in the trajectory of the Responsibility to Protect (R2P) concept.  R2P means that states and the international community have responsibility to protect people from serious humanitarian crisis.  The reason why this re-examination is required is because recent arguments on R2P are often on different planes due to their over- and under-valuations of the WS and its outcomes.  First, to address the over-valuations, this article clarifies that the WS Outcome Document was built in accordance with the opinions of states holding negative opinions toward the R2P concept, through reviewing the political process before and after the WS.  Second, this article questions the under-valuations, through re-reviewing the process, focusing on the roles of the UN Secretariat.  This article shows that the Secretariat has taken a central role in promoting R2P and that the emphasis has shifted from “intervention” to “conflict prevention”.  Concomitantly this article exposes otherwise under-valuated or unnoticed progress in institutionalization of the R2P concept.},
 pages = {17--32},
 title = {保護する責任（R2P）概念の展開の再検討 : 2005年世界サミットの成果とは何だったのか},
 volume = {第32巻},
 year = {2020},
 yomi = {ニシカイ, ヒロシ}
}