Contesting the ‘Responsibility to Protect’ in Southeast Asia: Rejection or Normative Resistance?

In: Global Responsibility to Protect
Zain MaulanaLecturer, Department of International Relations, Universitas Muhammadiyah Yogyakarta, Yogyakarta, Indonesia,

Search for other papers by Zain Maulana in
Current site
Google Scholar
Edward NewmanProfessor of International Security, School of Politics and International Studies, University of Leeds, Leeds, UK,

Search for other papers by Edward Newman in
Current site
Google Scholar
Download Citation Get Permissions

Access options

Get access to the full article by using one of the access options below.

Institutional Login

Log in with Open Athens, Shibboleth, or your institutional credentials

Login via Institution


Buy instant access (PDF download and unlimited online access):



This article explores the engagement of Southeast Asian states with the Responsibility to Protect principle (R2P) in relation to the Rohingya in Myanmar and the ‘war on drugs’ in the Philippines. It finds a form of contestation based upon subsidiary principles and local interests in which states have offered normative resistance to international scrutiny in order to justify their limited response to the atrocities. Elite stakeholders have emphasised that asean already has principles and frameworks to address abuses – which reflect the historical experience, social context, and political culture of the region – in order to support their resistance to R2P. While existing debates about the R2P principle in Southeast Asia tend to be oriented around the opposing poles of incremental adaptation and adoption versus outright rejection, our conclusion is distinct: R2P is consciously contested in Southeast Asia on normative grounds which must be understood in the context of the region.

Content Metrics

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 592 592 32
Full Text Views 61 61 0
PDF Views & Downloads 160 160 2