From Isis to Iciss
A critical return to the Responsibility to Protect report
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 8911463 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Philip Cunliffe (0000-0002-1617-3534, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2015 |
| Volume | 51 |
| Issue | 2 |
| Pages | 233-247 |
| Publication date | 2015-11-18 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Cooperation and Conflict (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0010-8367 • E-ISSN: 1460-3691 |
| Publisher | SAGE Publishing (PUBLISHER • US) |
| DOI | 10.1177/0010836715612854 |
| OpenAlex | W2337825251 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 5 |
| References cited | 29 |
In light of the post-intervention crisis in Libya, this article revisits critically the vision of the Responsibility to Protect (R2P) offered in the 2001 report of the International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty (ICISS) – frequently taken as the conceptual bedrock for R2P doctrine. It is argued that the perverse effect of ICISS doctrine is to replace political responsibility with paternalism. The demand that states be made accountable to the international community ends by making states accountable for their people rather than to their people. The argument is developed across five critical theses. These include claims that R2P changes the burden of justification for intervention, that it usurps popular sovereignty in favour of state power, and that it diffuses post-conflict responsibilities. The article concludes that pre-emptive ‘human protection’ efforts risk crowding out questions of systemic transformation, i.e. what kind of an international order we want to live in
Argument (complex analysis · Collective responsibility · Doctrine · Human rights · Humanitarian intervention · International law · Intervention (counseling · Law and economics · Paternalism · Political science · Politics · Power (physics · Responsibility to Protect · Sociology · Sovereignty · State (computer science · Global Peace and Security Dynamics · International Law and Human Rights · Law · Peacebuilding and International Security
Social Contract. Essays by Locke, Hume and Rousseau.
Norm Contestation and the Responsibility to Protect
The Responsibility to Protect and the End of the Western Century
The responsibility to protect? Imposing the ‘Liberal Peace’
Sovereign Equality vs. Imperial Right
From Right to Responsibility
Outlook
The Responsibility To Protect and the Crisis in Darfur
The Responsibility to Protect
Whose Sovereignty? Empire Versus International Law
Whither the Responsibility to Protect? Humanitarian Intervention and the 2005 World Summit
The Responsibility to Protect Turns Ten
The Law
Pluralist or Solidarist Conceptions of International Society
Humanitarian responsibilities and interventionist claims in international society
Sovereignty as irresponsibility? A Realist critique of the Responsibility to Protect
The responsibility to protect as a duty of care in international law and practice
The trouble with humanitarianism
Reflections on the domestic analogy
The Permanence of Inconsistency
Sovereignty as Responsibility
Humanitarian Intervention and International Relations
Kosovo and the Law of “Humanitarian Intervention”
Responsibility to Protect
Give War a Chance
Order and Justice in 'The anarchical society
The Jargon of Exception-On Schmitt, Agamben and the Absence of Political Society
| Unique citing works | 5 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 0,56 |
| Citation span | 2017 - 2024 (8) |
| Citation velocity | recent |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 5 |