Normative resistance to responsibility to protect in times of emerging multipolarity: the cases of Brazil and Russia

Abstract

• Este é um artigo publicado em acesso aberto e distribuído sob os termos da Licença de Atribuição Creative Commons, que permite uso irrestrito, distribuição e reprodução em qualquer meio, desde que o autor e a fonte originais sejam creditados.

La responsabilidad al proteger: buenas intenciones que acabaron en olvido

“…Además, la OTAN cuestionó severamente el carácter secuencial de los pilares que proponía la RAP. Por su parte, Rusia y China se mostraron cautelosos ante la propuesta, en tanto seguía considerando la posibilidad de una acción militar (Kotyashko, Ferreira-Pereira & Vysotskaya, 2018).…”

Protection or Interference? The Legitimacy of Contemporary Humanitarian Interventions and the Engagement of Nonhegemonic Powers

“…Given the legitimacy puzzle of intervention norms, it is important to examine the attitudes of nonhegemonic actors towards key examples of humanitarian responses and sovereignty disruptions. Brazil and Russia are excellent cases because of their protagonism during the debates about the military intervention in Libya (Kotyashko et al 2018). Brazil is a historical candidate for a permanent seat in the UNSC, and presents itself as a voice for developing countries, especially in Latin America; Russia is a surviving Cold War military power, a permanent member of the UNSC, and a Eurasian economic heavyweight.…”

“…Both countries strongly addressed the proposed military intervention in Libya on the grounds that it subverted the UN's basic mandate, raising important issues about the use of force (Kotyashko et al 2018) and its usual relation to international law (Ziegler 2016a); specifically, the debate about and formulation of R2P occurred in light of their perspectives on the sovereignty postulate (Welsh 2013). Their stances reflected different bets on their power projections and were good examples of the impact of resistance on the consubstantiation of international norms.…”

“…Brazil and Russia were major players in the burgeoning dispute about interventionist norms and values, expressing their willingness to play more prominent roles in norm entrepreneurship at the beginning of the decade (Kotyashko et al 2018). While Brazil proposed a new approach, Responsibility while Protecting (RwP), for amending some aspects of the R2P framework via multilateral debates, Russia expressed its scepticism about R2P and unilateral actions, as demonstrated by its foreign policy towards Libya and Syria, which made their national interests a main driver of Russia's stance within the UN (Trenin 2016).…”

“…Some analyses regard this not as contestation, but as a contribution to the process of norm formulation (Kotyashko et at 2018;Stuenkel 2016).…”