In defense of the responsibility to protect

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    Abstract

    This essay responds to Esther Reed's recent critique of the Responsibility to Protect (R2P) principle in this journal. It argues that Reed fundamentally misunderstands and misrepresents R2P. Her critique of R2P would have served well as a critique of the earlier concept of humanitarian intervention had it been penned in the late 1990s. But most of the problems and dangers that Reed identifies are in reality the very problems and dangers that R2P seeks to overcome, and I suggest that it does overcome them quite successfully. R2P does not impose Western ideals on the rest of the world, weaken the legal restrictions on the use of force, or promote abusive interventionism. Rather, it offers a bold but carefully constructed framework that holds the promise of promoting the protection of vulnerable populations from mass atrocities.
    Original languageEnglish
    Pages (from-to)169-182
    JournalJournal of Religious Ethics
    Volume41
    Issue number1
    DOIs
    Publication statusPublished - 2013

    Fingerprint Dive into the research topics of 'In defense of the responsibility to protect'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

    Cite this