Cookies Policy
X

This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse the site you are agreeing to our use of cookies.

I accept this policy

Find out more here

Responsibility While Protecting

No metrics data to plot.
The attempt to load metrics for this article has failed.
The attempt to plot a graph for these metrics has failed.
The full text of this article is not currently available.

Brill’s MyBook program is exclusively available on BrillOnline Books and Journals. Students and scholars affiliated with an institution that has purchased a Brill E-Book on the BrillOnline platform automatically have access to the MyBook option for the title(s) acquired by the Library. Brill MyBook is a print-on-demand paperback copy which is sold at a favorably uniform low price.

Access this article

+ Tax (if applicable)
Add to Favorites
You must be logged in to use this functionality

Brazil’s Proposal for Modifying Responsibility to Protect

In the evolution of the ‘responsibility to protect’ (R2P) doctrine, the most significant recent development has been the ‘responsibility while protecting’ (RWP) proposal as put forward by Brazil in September 2011, with a more detailed statement in November 2011. The RWP proposal emphasised the use of force as a last resort, and the need to avoid ‘regime change’; it also argued for closer monitoring of the use of force when R2P was invoked. Brazil’s approach to R2P was influenced by its noninterventionist attitudes deriving from its historical experience of the world. Brazil favoured caution and a focus on the responsibility of the state in relation to R2P; involvement in Haiti from 2004 highlighted the development-oriented approach to peacebuilding that Brazil preferred. The experience of R2P in Libya in 2011 was the immediate occasion for Brazil advancing the RWP proposal, with the situation in Syria also highlighting Brazilian concerns. The Brazilian proposal has been modified to some extent in subsequent discussion within the UN, but the main thrust of the proposal remains; issues relating to R2P such as sequencing and implementation have been clarified but without an overall consensus being achieved. While the Western countries generally favour flexibility in relation to R2P, the BRICS countries and the Global South are generally more cautious in their approach. The reception of the RWP proposal highlights the growing importance of the BRICS countries and the Global South in an increasingly pluralistic world.

Affiliations: 1: University of Melbourne, d.mcdougall@unimelb.edu.au

10.1163/1875984X-00601004
/content/journals/10.1163/1875984x-00601004
dcterms_title,pub_keyword,dcterms_description,pub_author
6
3
Loading
Loading

Full text loading...

/content/journals/10.1163/1875984x-00601004
Loading

Data & Media loading...

http://brill.metastore.ingenta.com/content/journals/10.1163/1875984x-00601004
Loading

Article metrics loading...

/content/journals/10.1163/1875984x-00601004
2014-01-01
2016-12-07

Sign-in

Can't access your account?
  • Tools

  • Add to Favorites
  • Printable version
  • Email this page
  • Subscribe to ToC alert
  • Get permissions
  • Recommend to your library

    You must fill out fields marked with: *

    Librarian details
    Your details
    Why are you recommending this title?
    Select reason:
     
    Global Responsibility to Protect — Recommend this title to your library
  • Export citations
  • Key

  • Full access
  • Open Access
  • Partial/No accessInformation