Norm circulation and responsibility to protect (R2P) : a retrospective analysis of the 2011 Libyan intervention

Show simple item record

dc.contributor.advisor Bizos, Anthony
dc.contributor.postgraduate Anand, Jaimal
dc.date.accessioned 2022-11-21T09:13:54Z
dc.date.available 2022-11-21T09:13:54Z
dc.date.created 2023
dc.date.issued 2022
dc.description Dissertation (MA (International Relations))--University of Pretoria, 2022. en_US
dc.description.abstract The United Nations Security Council (UNSC) invoked the Responsibility to Protect (R2P) during the Libyan crisis of February and March 2011. R2P was activated through Resolutions 1970 and 1973 on 26 February and 17 March 2011 respectively. Resolution 1973 authorised a North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO) intervention in Libya. The consequence was that many states, especially in the developing world, became concerned that R2P had been misused when NATO extended its mandate to ensure a regime change agenda. This led to the emerging narrative that R2P as a norm, like its predecessor on humanitarian intervention, is susceptible to abuse and misuse and that the potential risks associated with invoking R2P are too great. In the immediate aftermath of the Libyan intervention, Brazil proposed the Responsibility While Protecting (RwP) as a means to strengthen accountability measures and prevent future abuse of R2P. This study examines R2P as a norm and argues that the norm circulation model explains the emergence and evolution of norms in a way that is consistent with the evolution of R2P. This study contends that the norm lifecycle model is inadequate to address norm dynamics in their totality. The norm circulation model is for this study a critical tool of analysis to determine R2P’s status since the Libyan intervention. The model combines localisation, internalisation, and contestation of the norm to examine both the norm dynamic, and the evolution of a norm as it looks at agency and feedback that are considered central to the evolution of norms. This study contends that R2P is alive and remains an important part of the deliberations of the United Nations despite ongoing contestation on the implementation of R2P, especially in respect of pillar three, that provides for military intervention. Unlike humanitarian intervention, R2P is premised on the nexus between the state’s responsibility to its population and the sovereignty of the state. R2P provides a broad spectrum of options and interventions, apart from military intervention, which is a last resort. This study will however, through a retrospective analysis, of the NATO led 2011 Libyan intervention, examine the use of R2P and will argue that R2P at the United Nations continues to evolve as a norm within the international community. en_US
dc.description.availability Unrestricted en_US
dc.description.degree MA (International Relations) en_US
dc.description.department Political Sciences en_US
dc.identifier.citation * en_US
dc.identifier.other A2023
dc.identifier.uri https://repository.up.ac.za/handle/2263/88362
dc.language.iso en en_US
dc.publisher University of Pretoria
dc.rights © 2022 University of Pretoria. All rights reserved. The copyright in this work vests in the University of Pretoria. No part of this work may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, without the prior written permission of the University of Pretoria.
dc.subject Responsibility to Protect (R2P) en_US
dc.subject Norm life cycle en_US
dc.subject Libyan intervention en_US
dc.subject Norm circulation en_US
dc.subject Atrocity crime en_US
dc.subject UCTD en_US
dc.title Norm circulation and responsibility to protect (R2P) : a retrospective analysis of the 2011 Libyan intervention en_US
dc.type Dissertation en_US


Files in this item

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record