Is R2P still controversial? Continuity and change in the debate on ‘humanitarian intervention’

Abstract

Is the responsibility to protect (R2P) still controversial? The question is important because if R2P was no longer controversial, this would suggest that the principle is on track to consolidation as an international norm. The article assesses the impact of 16 years of sustained R2P advocacy and its influence on arguments within the scholarly community, and discusses the impact this engagement has had on the outline and substance of the principle itself. A survey of the development of the academic debate since 2005 suggests that the ‘responsibility to protect’ has successfully replaced ‘humanitarian intervention’ in international discourse, but that the principle remains controversial, especially beyond the policy community, particularly in the world of academe, in the humanitarian aid sector and religious organizations and with states with a colonial past.