demonstrate these trends.
Whilst these trends at the un seem clear, the extent to which norms associated with this agenda have found resonance, traction and acceptance in the various regions across the world differs in important ways. Africa – one region or many – has been a norm maker, shaper and taker
mechanisms. Finally, and in order to regulate the interplay between descriptive and normative theories, I propose a pragmatic criterion, the educational criterion , to help us to answer the thorny question of how to identify the standards or norms of human rationality. The main conclusion is that those
and normative theories, I propose a
pragmatic criterion, the educational criterion , to help us
to answer the thorny question of how to identify the standards or norms of
human rationality. The main conclusion is that those
Chinese government, the Security Council has been unable to exercise its responsibility to protect under R2P’s third pillar.
The lack of Security Council action in these two cases has sparked a debate over R2P’s legitimacy and normative strength. R2P supporters claim the norm has never been stronger
The responsibility to protect (R2P) is a norm-in-formation. While the UN system has embraced the principle formally and explicitly several times, 1 and authoritative international institutions and widely respected persons have begun to reference the concept frequently as the
Norms of global responsibility have evolved significantly since the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) was adopted in 1948, establishing the world’s framework for universal rights. While state sovereignty and the principle of non-intervention once determined political
what those references meant for practice. This uncertainty is indicative of the indeterminate character of norms; their meaning is constructed through discursive practice and is thus contingent on how agents interpret a particular situation, which can lead to contestation.
In the case of Syria