No Access

Tim Dunne

Building on arguments advanced in a new book on the idea of ‘special responsibilities’ in world politics, this article brings to the foreground what is often in the background of R2P debates. Specifically, it explores how far a special responsibilities frame can bridge the gap between the ‘permissive’ character of the R2P regime and the cosmopolitan desire to see decisive humanitarian rescue as an obligation. Special responsibilities also provides an opening to consider the other side of the register, namely, how the burdens and costs of intervention should be distributed. To date, it is realists who have raised such questions; I argue that, constructivists need to address them too. With better burden-sharing arrangements related to special responsibilities, great powers will be more inclined to accept the further movement of R2P in the direction of an obligatory regime.

No Access

Understanding Monitoring Systems in Different Contexts: A Focus on Curriculum Development, Teacher Agency and Monitoring Systems

A Proposed Monitoring System to Support Teaching and Learning in a Changing Society

Caroline Long and Tim Dunne

No Access

Arguing Matters

The Responsibility to Protect and the Case of Libya

Tim Dunne and Katharine Gelber

This article analyses international negotiations over the 2011 Libyan crisis during the short weeks between the start of the uprising and the passage and implementation of un Security Council Resolution 1973. We make two arguments: first, following Risse, we demonstrate how and when argumentation around the humanitarian norm of protecting civilians mattered in these debates; second, we show that failure on the part of the supporters of the intervention on humanitarian grounds to maintain consistent and genuine argumentation in relation to that mandate is a key factor in explaining the subsequent lack of agreement about collective action inside the Security Council. We conclude that the lesson that arguing mattered in relation to Libya has been insufficiently appreciated, but needs to be better understood in order to facilitate the future traction of the RtoP norm in international negotiations.

No Access

Tim Dunne and Katharine Gelber

This is a reply to Aiden Hehir’s critique of our earlier article published in this journal, in which we analysed international negotiations over the 2011 Libya crisis and argued that the humanitarian norm of protecting civilians was germane in these debates and subsequent United Nations Security Council Resolutions. In the reply we challenge some of Hehir’s allegations as to what was argued in the original article, reaffirm the argumentation framework against which we analysed the data, and summarise the evidence on which we relied.