Suchergebnisse

This article tries to analyze Chinese policy stance on the Responsibility to Protect (RtoP) concept from two levels: its basic attitude towards the core principles of this concept and its specific attitudes towards the execution of this concept, that is, the international intervention actions. Starting from the clarification of the RtoP concept, the article analyzes the maintenance and change of China's stance on state sovereign and non-interference principle. In the third part, four features of Chinese specific attitudes on intervention actions are abstracted, including cautiousness, aversion of military means, emphasis of UN authority and local support. Then the article further examines China's policy during the Libyan war, and finds that it basically follows the above framework. (Pac Rev/GIGA)

There is growing interest among scholars and advocates in the way that the nascent norm of the Responsibility to Protect (R2P) is diffusing at the regional level. This article critically explores the spread of R2P in Southeast Asia against the backdrop of recent scholarship on norm localization. It argues that, contrary to some recent analyses, the R2P norm has not been localized in Southeast Asia. Constitutive localization requires the active borrowing of transnational norms by local or regional actors who build congruence with local practices. Although some regional states have used the language of 'sovereignty as responsibility' there are few signs that local actors are driving the reception of the norm in the region, nor have they institutionalized it. Rather, outsider proponents are the primary advocates and the norm lacks a champion or well-connected 'insider' proponent among regional governments or civil society groups. Second, despite an energetic campaign by advocates, emphasizing consensual and capacity-building activities, many governments are still wary of R2P as a potential threat to sovereignty and regime security. As a result, regional states have taken an 'à la carte' approach to R2P, accepting aspects of the R2P agenda that they find least threatening or that support their national interests, while ignoring or quietly resisting those they find challenging. Rather than localization, what we are seeing with respect to R2P in Southeast Asia is a dramatic change in the way outsiders are reframing the norm. (Pac Rev/GIGA)

Aus sowjetischer Sicht

Aus sowjetischer Sicht

Sovereignty is often talked about as central to, even definitional of, contemporary international relations. We assume it as the source of state authority or use it to describe state capabilities. We talk about whether it is getting weaker, and occasionally about whether it is changing in some fundamental way. But rarely do we get into details about what it is, how it works, how it maintains itself, and what the effects are of sovereignty specifically, as opposed to some other organizing principle, on contemporary international relations. In this context, some of the patterns of state behavior that are easy to take for granted as part of the sovereign states system are in fact striking. States do not just compete with each other to maximize the national interest or cooperate with each other to provide global public goods. They also collude with each other to reinforce the centrality of the sovereign state as a category of actor in international relations. This pattern of collusion is what I call the sovereignty cartel.