China and the Responsibility to Protect (R2P): Towards a more active norm-shaping role?
Garwood-Gowers, Andrew (2016) China and the Responsibility to Protect (R2P): Towards a more active norm-shaping role? In International Studies Association Asia-Pacific Conference 2016, Hong Kong, June 25-27, 2016, City University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong. (Unpublished)
This paper considers two main questions. First, how has China engaged with R2P and influenced the concept’s normative trajectory? Second, is a distinct Chinese perspective and practice of R2P emerging? The paper advances two main arguments. First, a decade of official Chinese discourse reveals a large degree of continuity in terms of the perspectives expressed towards R2P. Most significantly, this indicates consistent support for R2P but clear efforts to frame the concept in a manner that aligns with China’s own normative preferences and interests. This has meant a strong emphasis on pillars I and II, while downplaying the potential for coercive, non-consensual action which could undermine the centrality of the state. The second main argument is that recent Chinese practice suggests a possible shift in strategy from norm resistance to a more proactive norm-shaping role in relation to R2P. Resistance – by blocking the implementation of coercive pillar III measures - remains an essential element of Beijing’s approach but there are signs that this is now being supplemented by more concerted Chinese efforts to entrench the consensual state-assistance components of R2P which Beijing supports. This is reflected in more visible engagement in normative discourse – via the RP concept’s conservative interpretation of the international community’s protection role - and more practically, in enhanced Chinese contributions to peace operations in Africa and diplomatic efforts to resolve protection crises.
Impact and interest:
Citation counts are sourced monthly from and citation databases.
These databases contain citations from different subsets of available publications and different time periods and thus the citation count from each is usually different. Some works are not in either database and no count is displayed. Scopus includes citations from articles published in 1996 onwards, and Web of Science® generally from 1980 onwards.
Citations counts from theindexing service can be viewed at the linked Google Scholar™ search.
Full-text downloads displays the total number of times this work’s files (e.g., a PDF) have been downloaded from QUT ePrints as well as the number of downloads in the previous 365 days. The count includes downloads for all files if a work has more than one.
|Item Type:||Conference Paper|
|Subjects:||Australian and New Zealand Standard Research Classification > STUDIES IN HUMAN SOCIETY (160000) > POLITICAL SCIENCE (160600) > Defence Studies (160604)
Australian and New Zealand Standard Research Classification > STUDIES IN HUMAN SOCIETY (160000) > POLITICAL SCIENCE (160600) > International Relations (160607)
Australian and New Zealand Standard Research Classification > LAW AND LEGAL STUDIES (180000) > LAW (180100)
Australian and New Zealand Standard Research Classification > LAW AND LEGAL STUDIES (180000) > LAW (180100) > International Law (excl. International Trade Law) (180116)
|Divisions:||Current > QUT Faculties and Divisions > Faculty of Law
Current > Schools > School of Law
|Copyright Owner:||Copyright 2016 The Author(s)|
|Copyright Statement:||please do not distribute or cite without permission|
|Deposited On:||25 Aug 2016 00:56|
|Last Modified:||25 Aug 2016 01:42|
Repository Staff Only: item control page