R S Illingworth

Biographic Data

ID4153290
NAMER S Illingworth
GIVEN NAMESR S
FAMILY NAMEIllingworth
SIGNATUREILLINGWORTH R S
AFFILIATIONSUniversity of Glasgow
ORCID0000-0003-2162-0455
VERIFIEDYes
TOTAL WORKS9
TOTAL CITATIONS4
AUTHOR COUNT9
EDITOR COUNT0
FIRST PUBLICATION YEAR2019
LATEST PUBLICATION YEAR2026
H-INDEX1

  • Delusions of Saviour? Reform and Relevance at 20 Years of the Responsibility to Protect

    Open AccessR S IllingworthARTICLEGlobal Responsibility to Protect2026

    Twenty years on from its endorsement at the 2005 World Summit, the Responsibility to Protect (R2P) is widely described as being in crisis. Ongoing mass atrocities in Gaza, Ukraine, Myanmar, Sudan, and elsewhere underscore a stark tension between R2P’s entrenchment within the UN system and the apparent permanence of atrocity crimes. Engaging with post- and de-colonial critiques, this piece interrogates whether R2P represents a ‘delusion of saviour…

  • Gaza and the failure of atrocity prevention: Placing the responsibility to protect on stronger cosmopolitan foundations

    Open AccessR S IllingworthARTICLECooperation and Conflict2025Cited by: 1References: 13

    The policy of key liberal Western states towards the latest conflagration in Israel-Gaza highlights the troubling connection between global harms and the failure to prevent mass atrocities. But there is a problem: states are often themselves complicit in propagating the underlying structures of mass atrocity in other states. This means that there is a conceptual gap in the logic of R2P’s preventive agenda. The result is an R2P doctrine that misse…

  • Not the ‘Fairest Norm of Them All’ but Still Needed: On Hobson and Criticism of the Responsibility to Protect

    Open AccessR S IllingworthARTICLEJournal of Intervention and…2024Cited by: 2References: 4

    The Responsibility to Protect (R2P)a commitment to prevent and respond to mass atrocity crimeshas often come under fire. In my contribution to this forum, I wish to respond to some points raised by Christopher Hobson's interesting article titled The Moral Untouchability of the Responsibility to Protect. In doing so, I offer some thoughts about the direction of scholarship on R2P, arguing that, despite its flaws, abandoning the R2P doctrine would …

  • The permanency of mass atrocities: The fallacy of ‘never again’

    Open AccessAdrian Gallagher, R S Illingworth et al.ARTICLEThe British Journal of Politics…2024References: 18

    The terminology of ‘never again’ has been studied in Sociology, Cultural Studies and History, yet remains neglected in International Relations. This is despite its centrality in debates over humanitarian intervention, the Responsibility to Protect and mass atrocity prevention. To foster a conversation over the term’s use, this article uses an interdisciplinary approach to show how the meaning of ‘never again’ has changed over time. Building on th…

  • The Responsibility to Protect: A Bibliography

    Open AccessAdrian Gallagher, Blake Lawrinson et al.ARTICLEGlobal Responsibility to Protect2023References: 387

    This open-access bibliography provides an extensive compilation of research conducted on the Responsibility to Protect (R2P) and relevant themes

  • An R2P Commission: A Proposal for Holding States Accountable to Their Responsibility to Protect

    Open AccessR S IllingworthARTICLEGlobal Studies Quarterly2022References: 5

    In 2005, the United Nations (UN) committed to a “responsibility to protect” (R2P) against four mass-atrocity crimes of genocide, war crimes, crimes against humanity, and ethnic cleansing. This was a clear commitment acknowledging that states hold responsibilities to consider the protection needs of domestic, and outside, populations. However, holding actors accountable to their R2P commitments is difficult due to the politicization of the norm an…

  • The Responsibility to Protect and the Failures of the United Nations Security Council by Patrick M. Butchard

    R S IllingworthARTICLEGlobal Responsibility to Protect2021

    Despite the Responsibility to Protect (R2P) being a multifaceted commitment to prevent and halt mass atrocity crimes, much of the debate surrounding its impact has centred on its contentious and reaction-focused ‘third pillar’. The question as to whether action has successfully been taken under R2P’s third pillar often focuses on the role of the United Nations (UN) Security Council as the primary duty bearer to act in response to cases of manifes…

  • Responsible Veto Restraint: A Transitional Cosmopolitan Reform Measure for the Responsibility to Protect

    Open AccessR S IllingworthARTICLEGlobal Responsibility to Protect2020Cited by: 1References: 7

    This article examines reform to the ‘veto’ power held by the five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council. The responsibility to react to mass atrocity crimes under the Responsibility to Protect (R2P) lies predominantly in the hands of the Security Council, meaning that R2P and the veto are inseparable. Veto use can obstruct the Council from meeting its R2P, reflected by the ongoing crisis in Syria, over which 16 Council draft re…

  • The Responsibility to Protect and a cosmopolitan approach to human protection

    Open AccessR S Illingworth, Richard IllingworthARTICLEInternational Affairs2019

    Surprisingly little academic work has been concerned with the relationship between the Responsibility to Protect (R2P) and cosmopolitan theory. Samuel Wyatt's The Responsibility to Protect and a cosmopolitan approach to human protection offers a critical stride towards rectifying this deficit by highlighting the links between R2P, a cosmopolitan approach to human protection and R2P's growing legal significance. This critical engagement with the c…