Singing the tune of sovereignty? India and the responsibility to protect
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 5680896 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Gerrit Kurtz (0000-0002-9575-853X, Global Public Policy Institute, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2014 |
| Volume | 14 |
| Issue | 4 |
| Pages | 461-487 |
| Publication date | 2014-08-08 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Conflict Security and Development (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 1467-8802 • E-ISSN: 1478-1174 |
| Publisher | Informa UK Limited (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1080/14678802.2014.930591 |
| OpenAlex | W1970128522 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 13 |
| References cited | 17 |
With an ostensible commitment to sovereignty and non-intervention and a long standing involvement in United Nations peacekeeping operations, India's position on R2P seems puzzling. Still, despite the rhetoric about India being an ‘emerging power’, it often abstains from diplomatic engagement beyond its region, including in R2P situations. What explains its sceptical interpretation, cautious attitude and limited practice? The paper shows that India's position has evolved in three phases since 2005, from scepticism via calibrated engagement to renewed suspicions after the fallout of the Libya intervention. The paper argues that mainly domestic factors can account for these changes in India's R2P policy. Despite these changes, however, India's main concerns with R2P display remarkable consistency: an insistence on the consent of the state; a narrow definition of its scope involving a high threshold of violence; the exclusive authority of the UN Security Council; and a deeply ingrained scepticism towards the utility of the use of force
Apprehension · Economics · Epistemology · Humanitarian intervention · International law · Peacekeeping · Political economy · Political science · Politics · Responsibility to Protect · Rhetoric · Security council · Skepticism · Sociology · Sovereignty · Use of force · Global Peace and Security Dynamics · Law · Peacebuilding and International Security · Philosophy · Politics and Conflicts in Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Middle East · Psychology
Responsibility to Protect” and the BRICS
Negotiated Coexistence”
What prospects for common humanity in a divided world? The scope for RtoP in a transitional international order
The Growing Power of States in India’s Foreign Policy
China's and India's perspectives on military intervention
India on Humanitarian Intervention and Responsibility to Protect
India in South Asia
Non-Western engagement in peace processes and the rise of ‘hedging’ by elites in conflict-affected states
Evolution, retreat or rejection
The Responsibility to Protect
Indian Perspectives on the ‘Responsibility to Protect
Can constituent states influence foreign and security policy? Coalitional dynamics in India
India and the responsibility to protect
Saving Strangers
India and the Responsibility to Protect
Tilting at Windmills? The Indian Debate over the Responsibility to Protect after UNSC Resolution 1973
Policy and performance under democratic coalitions
India’s Search for a Post-Cold War Foreign Policy
Humanitarian intervention
A Case for India’s ‘Leadership’ in United Nations Peacekeeping
India's Search for Power
Humanitarian Intervention
India's Regional Security Doctrine
India's Regional and International Support for Democracy
Even Paranoids Have Enemies
Political theory and international relations
India in the twenty-first century
India's Military Intervention in East Pakistan, 1971-1972
| Unique citing works | 13 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 1,18 |
| Citation span | 2015 - 2023 (9) |
| Citation velocity | historical |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 13 |