Mapping dissent: The responsibility to protect and its state critics
Addressing dissent, also known as ‘rejectionism’, will broaden and deepen the global consensus on the Responsibility to Protect (R2P) principle. However, how should scholars understand the objections raised by state critics? To answer this question, I analyse R2P opposition as presented in official...
Saved in:
Main Author: | |
---|---|
Format: | text |
Language: | English |
Published: |
Institutional Knowledge at Singapore Management University
2013
|
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/soss_research/3902 https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/context/soss_research/article/5160/viewcontent/Mapping_dissent_The_responsibility_to_protect_and_its_state_critics.pdf |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
Institution: | Singapore Management University |
Language: | English |
id |
sg-smu-ink.soss_research-5160 |
---|---|
record_format |
dspace |
spelling |
sg-smu-ink.soss_research-51602024-01-25T06:43:26Z Mapping dissent: The responsibility to protect and its state critics Patrick QUINTON-BROWN, Addressing dissent, also known as ‘rejectionism’, will broaden and deepen the global consensus on the Responsibility to Protect (R2P) principle. However, how should scholars understand the objections raised by state critics? To answer this question, I analyse R2P opposition as presented in official UN transcripts, voting records, and resolutions. The article reveals that six related themes of dissent exist with varying degrees of emphasis amongst opponents. Conventional depictions of R2P opposition, such as the absolute sovereignty or North vs. South explanations, are therefore inadequate representations of the diverse range of arguments employed by dissenters. Ultimately, I conclude that in order to build consensus at the expense of dissent, the principle should be further developed around four key notions: 1) non-coercive prevention and domestic capacity building, 2) enhanced prudential criteria for intervention, 3) global norm entrepreneurship from the Global South, and 4) veto restraint in R2P scenarios. 2013-01-01T08:00:00Z text application/pdf https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/soss_research/3902 info:doi/10.1163/1875984X-00503003 https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/context/soss_research/article/5160/viewcontent/Mapping_dissent_The_responsibility_to_protect_and_its_state_critics.pdf http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ Research Collection School of Social Sciences eng Institutional Knowledge at Singapore Management University Responsibility to protect R2P dissent R2P rejectionism Sovereignty Global governance United nations Political Science Public Policy |
institution |
Singapore Management University |
building |
SMU Libraries |
continent |
Asia |
country |
Singapore Singapore |
content_provider |
SMU Libraries |
collection |
InK@SMU |
language |
English |
topic |
Responsibility to protect R2P dissent R2P rejectionism Sovereignty Global governance United nations Political Science Public Policy |
spellingShingle |
Responsibility to protect R2P dissent R2P rejectionism Sovereignty Global governance United nations Political Science Public Policy Patrick QUINTON-BROWN, Mapping dissent: The responsibility to protect and its state critics |
description |
Addressing dissent, also known as ‘rejectionism’, will broaden and deepen the global consensus on the Responsibility to Protect (R2P) principle. However, how should scholars understand the objections raised by state critics? To answer this question, I analyse R2P opposition as presented in official UN transcripts, voting records, and resolutions. The article reveals that six related themes of dissent exist with varying degrees of emphasis amongst opponents. Conventional depictions of R2P opposition, such as the absolute sovereignty or North vs. South explanations, are therefore inadequate representations of the diverse range of arguments employed by dissenters. Ultimately, I conclude that in order to build consensus at the expense of dissent, the principle should be further developed around four key notions: 1) non-coercive prevention and domestic capacity building, 2) enhanced prudential criteria for intervention, 3) global norm entrepreneurship from the Global South, and 4) veto restraint in R2P scenarios. |
format |
text |
author |
Patrick QUINTON-BROWN, |
author_facet |
Patrick QUINTON-BROWN, |
author_sort |
Patrick QUINTON-BROWN, |
title |
Mapping dissent: The responsibility to protect and its state critics |
title_short |
Mapping dissent: The responsibility to protect and its state critics |
title_full |
Mapping dissent: The responsibility to protect and its state critics |
title_fullStr |
Mapping dissent: The responsibility to protect and its state critics |
title_full_unstemmed |
Mapping dissent: The responsibility to protect and its state critics |
title_sort |
mapping dissent: the responsibility to protect and its state critics |
publisher |
Institutional Knowledge at Singapore Management University |
publishDate |
2013 |
url |
https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/soss_research/3902 https://ink.library.smu.edu.sg/context/soss_research/article/5160/viewcontent/Mapping_dissent_The_responsibility_to_protect_and_its_state_critics.pdf |
_version_ |
1789483290576551936 |