Emerging Powers and the Notion of International Responsibility: moral duty or shifting goalpost?

Kai Michael Kenkel,Marcelle Trote Martins

doi:10.1590/1981-38212016000100003

Kai Michael Kenkel, Marcelle Trote Martins

Open Access

https://doi.org/10.1590/1981-38212016000100003

Copy DOI

Abstract

The rise of new powers and attendant shifts in the global balance of power have led to calls for UN Security Council reform. Established powers have often responded by linking increased influence in the international system with the assumption of more international responsibility by aspirant powers. Based on ethical and philosophical approaches from the individual and state levels, and a case study of Brazil, this article analyses the way in which the notion of responsibility is discursively constructed, demonstrating the manner in which it has been used as an ever-shifting goalpost to deny emerging powers participation at the highest levels of global strategic decision-making. Most often, this is done by equating “responsibility” with the ability and willingness to use robust military force.

Highlights

The rise of new powers and attendant shifts in the global balance of power have led to calls for UN Security Council reform
Based on ethical and philosophical approaches to the notion of responsibility, and their transposition to the state and international level, from IR theory, as well as a brief analysis of an emerging power —Brazil's — engagement with the concept, this article analyses the way in which the notion of responsibility is discursively constructed, demonstrating the manner in which it has been used as an ever-shifting goalpost to deny emerging powers participation at the highest levels of global strategic decision making
Once the analysis is situated at the level of the state, the discussion approaches the difference between the often-enshrined great power special systemic responsibility and how the notion of responsibility relates to emerging powers' quest for more influence