The responsibility to protect in Southeast Asia: between non-interference and sovereignty as responsibility

Bellamy, Alex J. and Drummond, Catherine (2011) The responsibility to protect in Southeast Asia: between non-interference and sovereignty as responsibility. Pacific Review, 24 2: 179-200. doi:10.1080/09512748.2011.560958

Attached Files (Some files may be inaccessible until you login with your UQ eSpace credentials)
Name Description MIMEType Size Downloads

Author Bellamy, Alex J.
Drummond, Catherine
Title The responsibility to protect in Southeast Asia: between non-interference and sovereignty as responsibility
Journal name Pacific Review   Check publisher's open access policy
ISSN 0951-2748
Publication date 2011-05-01
Sub-type Article (original research)
DOI 10.1080/09512748.2011.560958
Open Access Status Not yet assessed
Volume 24
Issue 2
Start page 179
End page 200
Total pages 22
Place of publication Abingdon, Oxon, United Kingdom
Publisher Routledge
Language eng
Subject 3305 Geography, Planning and Development
3312 Sociology and Political Science
Abstract The responsibility to protect (R2P) comprises each state's responsibility to protect its own populations from genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity, the international community's duty to assist states in this endeavour, and a responsibility for the international community to take timely and decisive action in situations where the host state has manifestly failed. At first glance, the latter two elements of this principle seem to require behaviour that contradicts the principle of non-interference. This raises questions as to why R2P was endorsed by Southeast Asian governments and whether it can be localised in a region whose politics are underpinned by non-interference. This article argues that processes of norm localisation are producing an accommodation between the two principles. This accommodation involves the formal retention of both principles but the subtle realignment of each in order to make them compatible and make support for both coherent. It is this third explanation, we argue, that best explains the relationship between R2P and non-interference in SoutheastAsia: R2P has been revised to limit its capacity to legitimise coercive interference, whilst non-interference is in the process of being recalibrated to permit expressions of concern, offers of assistance and even the application of limited diplomatic pressure in response to major humanitarian crises. Thus, whilst the region remains largely hostile to doctrinal revisions to non-interference, subtle changes are evident in practice. This article outlines the evolution of R2P as a challenge to traditional notions of state sovereignty, provides an overview of non-interference and past efforts to revise the principle, and examines two case studies to understand how the two principles are being accommodated in practice.
Keyword Asean
Q-Index Code C1
Q-Index Status Provisional Code
Institutional Status UQ

Document type: Journal Article
Sub-type: Article (original research)
Collections: TC Beirne School of Law Publications
School of Political Science and International Studies Publications
Version Filter Type
Citation counts: TR Web of Science Citation Count  Cited 11 times in Thomson Reuters Web of Science Article | Citations
Scopus Citation Count Cited 18 times in Scopus Article | Citations
Google Scholar Search Google Scholar
Created: Thu, 28 Nov 2013, 06:40:53 EST by System User on behalf of T.C. Beirne School of Law