The BRICS and the Future of R2P: Was Syria or Libya the Exception?

Share
logo
 

Author: Oliver Stuenkel  
Source: Global Responsibility to Protect, Volume 6, Issue 1, pages 3 – 28
Subjects: Human Rights & Humanitarian Law
Publication Year : 2014
DOI: 10.1163/1875984X-00601002
ISSN: 1875-9858
E-ISSN: 1875-984X

This article is freely avaible here

Abstract: 

This article assesses the BRICS’ position on the emerging global norm of the Responsibility to Protect, analyses the year 2011, when all the BRICS occupied a seat on the UN Security Council, and asks how the rise of the BRICS will affect R2P’s prospects of turning into a global norm. It argues that while it is generally thought that ‘non-Western’ emerging powers are reluctant to embrace R2P, rising powers’ views on the norm in question are far more nuanced. Common accusations depicting the BRICS as ‘irresponsible stakeholders’ are misguided, as emerging powers have supported R2P in the vast majority of cases. The BRICS are in fundamental agreement about the principle that undergirds R2P, and their support for R2P’s pillar I and II is absolute. Regarding pillar III, the BRICS at times diverge from Western countries not about the existence of the norm, but about when and how to apply it.

Read also:

 The BRICS and R2P: Was Syria an exception?

West Africa’s contribution to R2P

What does China think about R2P?