Context of R2P/ Human Rights POLS1201

Liberalism: protect individuals

Liberalism supports the idea that protecting individual rights is a core global responsibility. It sees international law and institutions as tools to prevent atrocities and promote universal rights.

Constructivism: norm of humanitarianism

Constructivism highlights that the idea of protecting people from mass violence (like genocide) has become a global norm. R2P is an example of how shared moral values shape international action.

Realism: states act in self-interest

Realists argue that states will only support human rights or intervention when it aligns with their own national interests. If there’s no gain, they won’t act—even during crises.

Postcolonialism: selective application

Postcolonialism critiques how human rights and R2P are often applied unevenly—used to justify intervention in weaker states, but ignored when powerful countries (or their allies) violate rights.

Pillar 1, 2, 3 of R2P

• Pillar 1: States must protect their own populations from genocide, war crimes, and crimes against humanity.

• Pillar 2: The international community should help states build capacity to do this.

• Pillar 3: If a state fails, the international community can take action—including intervention—as a last resort.

Human rights (UDHR)

The Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948) is a foundational document listing the basic rights and freedoms all people should have, like equality, safety, and freedom of speech.

Universalism vs relativism

• Universalism says human rights are the same for everyone, everywhere.

• Relativism argues that rights should reflect local culture, values, and context—not just Western ideas.

Sovereignty vs intervention

A major tension in IR: states have the right to control what happens within their borders, but R2P allows intervention when a state commits or fails to stop mass atrocities.

Libya (2011): R2P worked (UN backed)

The UN authorized intervention to protect civilians during the civil war. NATO acted under Pillar 3 of R2P, which many saw as a success—though it later caused instability.

Syria: R2P failed (no UNSC agreement)

Despite mass atrocities, the UN Security Council was blocked by Russia and China, showing how power politics can stop R2P even when humanitarian crises occur.

Rohingya in Myanmar: No action taken = selective

Despite clear signs of ethnic cleansing, the global response was minimal. This reflects postcolonial concerns about the West selectively applying R2P based on interest.

China + Uighurs: Sovereignty blocks intervention

Reports of mass detention and repression in Xinjiang have raised global concern, but no action has been taken due to China’s power and claim to sovereignty.

Human Rights Council: Accused of bias, limited power

The UN Human Rights Council promotes rights globally, but it's been criticized for being politicized, inconsistent, and lacking real enforcement power.