The power of old ideas newly expressed

Abstract

Abstract This article tracks the legitimization practices deployed to change the discourse regarding coercive interventions to protect human lives which, at the end of the 1990s, became both acceptable practices discussed in multilateral settings and deeply controversial issues. It focuses on the “Responsibility to Protect” (R2P) and two important strategies. The first is the proposition to change the ways in which we talk about (military) intervention for human protection purposes, i.e. a passage from “humanitarian intervention” and the “right to intervene” towards R2P. The second is the practices that agents hoped would give legitimacy to their ideas, especially regarding postcolonial states, historically skeptical and critical of humanitarian intervention. I argue that the agents were able to reframe the debate using more legitimate discourse while adopting legitimization practices to raise the acceptability of R2P.