Abstract

At a time when the “Responsibility to Protect” (R2P) concept continues to be an object of widespread controversy, particularly with BRICS countries openly condemning the way it has been implemented by Western states, the question of the future evolution of the norm remains uncertain. While the constructivist literature initially pointed to the consolidation of the norm which was widely accepted by heads of states during the 2005 World Summit, the application has been criticized by Third World Approaches to International Law (TWAIL) for being Western-led and biased, oriented toward regime-change and reminding the world of a new type of colonial enterprise. BRICS members embraced this perspective, and condemned in unison the Libyan intervention for going beyond the scope of its mandate and occasioning greater harm than it prevented. The authors of this article analyse BRICS perspectives on the “Responsibility to Protect” and seek to understand whether the geopolitical formation could, by unifying and building up on contestation mechanisms, contribute to the renewal and rebuilding of this doctrine, thus ensuring its greater credibility. The qualitative investigation is based on the study of interviews conducted with experts from BRICS and some western countries. The findings indicate that if BRICS member states succeed in adopting a common conceptual perspective, the global acceptance of the “Responsibility to Protect” could increase but that all the new checks and balances advocated by them could lead to delays in interventions to prevent human rights abuses moving forward.

Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call