On the Uses and ‘Abuses’ of Responsibility to Protect

Critics of the R2P doctrine routinely warn of its abuse potential, but often leave underdescribed what this abuse consists of, and how it differs from the proper, legitimate use of R2P. This chapter seeks to remedy this descriptive neglect. The author distinguishes three kinds of foreign intervention that might, for different reasons, be considered abuses or misappropriations of the R2P norm. The first is where the language of R2P is used to publicly justify an intervention that in fact has little to do with protecting vulnerable populations. These are cases in which humanitarian rhetoric is used as window-dressing for economic or political self-aggrandizement. The second kind of R2P abuse involves its unilateral implementation. Third, the R2P norm is arguably abused when it is over-extended, as where it is invoked to justify the forcible democratization of undemocratic states, rather than being limited to the prevention of grave human rights violations.