Abstract

With an ostensible commitment to sovereignty and non-intervention and a long standing involvement in United Nations peacekeeping operations, India's position on R2P seems puzzling. Still, despite the rhetoric about India being an ‘emerging power’, it often abstains from diplomatic engagement beyond its region, including in R2P situations. What explains its sceptical interpretation, cautious attitude and limited practice? The paper shows that India's position has evolved in three phases since 2005, from scepticism via calibrated engagement to renewed suspicions after the fallout of the Libya intervention. The paper argues that mainly domestic factors can account for these changes in India's R2P policy. Despite these changes, however, India's main concerns with R2P display remarkable consistency: an insistence on the consent of the state; a narrow definition of its scope involving a high threshold of violence; the exclusive authority of the UN Security Council; and a deeply ingrained scepticism towards the utility of the use of force.

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