| Publication |
2012.
|
| Summary/Abstract |
At the 2005 World Summit, ASEAN Member States contributed to an official global consensus that states do indeed have a responsibility to protect their populations from the four mass atrocity crimes of genocide, ethnic cleansing, war crimes, and crimes against humanity. As is the case in a number of regions, however, there is a strong sense of caution - if not hostility - in Southeast Asia (and East Asia more broadly) towards the Responsibility to Protect's provision for military interventions as a last resort, in order to protect populations from such harm. Furthermore, there is an accompanying, more general ambivalence towards the perceived relevance of the norm for Southeast Asia, due to the perceived nature and/or intensity of conflicts in the region. Against this backdrop, this article attempts to shed light on a sub-altern discourse in the region that argues that the RtoP is not only relevant, but that it is critical it be operationalised in light of the various manifestations of conflict that plague the region.
|