24 April 2009
NTS Alert (Apr 2009 – Issue 2)
Abstract
The doctrine of the Responsibility to Protect is a controversial and contentious one in Southeast Asia. It has been largely accepted in principle by most ASEAN states, which are generally supportive of the first two pillars, but are wary of the third, reactive pillar. Thus in exploring the advancement of the R2P agenda in Southeast Asia, our discussion will focus on the first two pillars of the R2P. We will examine the historical context of ASEAN with regard to how its member states view the R2P, where they stand on the doctrine, and how the regional bloc might evolve in its understanding and adaption of the norm to suit the region.
Abstract
The doctrine of the Responsibility to Protect is a controversial and contentious one in Southeast Asia. It has been largely accepted in principle by most ASEAN states, which are generally supportive of the first two pillars, but are wary of the third, reactive pillar. Thus in exploring the advancement of the R2P agenda in Southeast Asia, our discussion will focus on the first two pillars of the R2P. We will examine the historical context of ASEAN with regard to how its member states view the R2P, where they stand on the doctrine, and how the regional bloc might evolve in its understanding and adaption of the norm to suit the region.
