The inconsistent application of the United Nations (UN) Responsibility to Protect (R2P) doctrine has facilitated a discussion on the legitimacy of the principle. While the legal and ethical issues...Show moreThe inconsistent application of the United Nations (UN) Responsibility to Protect (R2P) doctrine has facilitated a discussion on the legitimacy of the principle. While the legal and ethical issues concerning R2P have been examined in detail, scholars have mostly neglected its practical dimension. In order to interpret the inconsistent implementation of R2P, the cases of Syria and the Central African Republic (CAR) serve as a comparative framework. Thereby, this paper argues that the geopolitical interests of the Security Council’s permanent member states had a major impact on the adoption of R2P’s non-coercive and coercive instruments. From these case studies and the UNSC’s in/-action three implications for R2P are inferred: that the conditions for the successful implementation of the principle are dependent on the P5, that its application does not in fact delegitimise the doctrine and that a reformist approach can improve the inconsistencies in international response.Show less
