In Defense of the Responsibility to Protect

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 interven...

全面介绍

Saved in:  
书目详细资料
主要作者: Glanville, Luke (Author)
格式: 电子 文件
语言:English
Check availability: HBZ Gateway
Journals Online & Print:
载入...
Fernleihe:Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste
出版: Wiley-Blackwell 2013
In: Journal of religious ethics
Year: 2013, 卷: 41, 发布: 1, Pages: 169-182
Further subjects:B Humanitarian Intervention
B mass atrocities
B Human Rights
B Just War
B Genocide
B Responsibility to Protect
在线阅读: Volltext (lizenzpflichtig)
Volltext (lizenzpflichtig)
Parallel Edition:Non-electronic
实物特征
总结: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.
ISSN:1467-9795
Contains:Enthalten in: Journal of religious ethics
Persistent identifiers:DOI: 10.1111/jore.12008