Contesting the ‘Responsibility to Protect’ in Southeast Asia

Rejection or Normative Resistance

Bibliographic Data

ID12960694
AuthorsZain Maulana (0000-0002-9982-5920, Muhammadiyah University of Yogyakarta, corresponding author), Edward Newman (0000-0002-2414-5269, University of Leeds)
Year2022
Volume14
Issue1
Pages37-74
Publication date2022-02-01
Peer ReviewedYes
Open AccessNo
TypeARTICLE
VenueGlobal Responsibility to Protect (JOURNAL)
Journal identifiersISSN: 1875-984X • E-ISSN: 1875-9858
PublisherBrill (PUBLISHER • NL)
DOI10.1163/1875-984x-14010001
OpenAlexW4213061277
LanguageEN
Citations received6

This article explores the engagement of Southeast Asian states with the Responsibility to Protect principle (R2P) in relation to the Rohingya in Myanmar and the ‘war on drugs’ in the Philippines. It finds a form of contestation based upon subsidiary principles and local interests in which states have offered normative resistance to international scrutiny in order to justify their limited response to the atrocities. Elite stakeholders have emphasised that asean already has principles and frameworks to address abuses – which reflect the historical experience, social context, and political culture of the region – in order to support their resistance to R2P. While existing debates about the R2P principle in Southeast Asia tend to be oriented around the opposing poles of incremental adaptation and adoption versus outright rejection, our conclusion is distinct: R2P is consciously contested in Southeast Asia on normative grounds which must be understood in the context of the region

Context (archaeology · Elite · Environmental ethics · Geography · Human rights · International law · Normative · Political economy · Political science · Politics · Resistance (ecology · Responsibility to Protect · Scrutiny · Sociology · Asian Geopolitics and Ethnography · Global Peace and Security Dynamics · International Law and Human Rights · Law

Tools

Open DOI