Abstract
In 2011, based on the R2P principles, the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) authorized a military intervention led by NATO in Libya to “protect civilians”. Yet, the UNSC could not agree on sanctions or military action to protect civilians in Syria. Analyzing the relevant UNSC resolutions, official documents, and formal statements of state representatives, this study aims to uncover the discursive practices around military interventions. More specifically, it explores official discourses that legitimized the NATO-led military intervention in Libya and non-intervention in Syria. A comparative analysis of the Libyan and Syrian cases presents us with an opportunity to assess where R2P currently stands as an international norm.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
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
