Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-qsmjn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-23T07:03:19.381Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

What Should Be Done? Pragmatic Constructivist Ethics and the Responsibility to Protect

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 December 2017

Jason Ralph
Get access

Abstract

In this paper I examine what constructivist approaches to IR tell us about how states should act when confronted by atrocity crimes in the context of a politically pluralist international society. Building on the work of theorists who responded to Richard Price and Christian Reus-Smit's call to substantiate the constructivist's claim to explain “moral progress,” and to better inform normative assessments, I claim that the constructivist emphasis on historical and social contingency does not rule out ethical standpoints, suggesting instead a “pragmatic” ethic. Norms are hypotheses rather than absolute values. The task of the pragmatic constructivist is not to establish beyond doubt the normativity of a norm—the task is to test the norm for how well its “meaning-in-use” supports action that ameliorates lived social problems. Pragmatic constructivists can commit to the Responsibility to Protect (R2P) as an idea that might reconcile various communities of normative practice and ameliorate vulnerability without upsetting international order. To the extent particular practices (e.g., prevention) have proven (and continue to prove) useful in doing this, pragmatic constructivists can equate the institutionalization of those practices with normative progress. However, R2P is a “complex” norm. It recognizes that knowledge of how to respond to ongoing atrocity is context specific and cannot therefore be fixed. The task of the pragmatic constructivist here is to assess the practical judgment of those that claim to speak for the norm by weighing the consequences of acting out their prescription in the specific context of a particular crisis. I test the meanings of R2P in use during the Syria crisis from 2011 to 2012. R2P was problematic to the extent certain meanings reinforced policy ends (e.g., protection through political/criminal accountability) that were impractical and pursued at the expense of non-ideal but realizable goals (e.g., protection through peace/aid).

Type
Research Article
Information
International Organization , Volume 72 , Issue 1 , Winter 2018 , pp. 173 - 203
Copyright
Copyright © The IO Foundation 2017 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Abraham, Kavi Joseph, and Abramson, Yehonatan. 2015. A Pragmatist Vocation for International Relations: The (Global) Public and Its Problems. European Journal of International Relations 23 (1):26–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Acharya, Amitav. 2004. How Ideas Spread: Whose Norms Matter? Norm Localization and Institutional Change in Asian Regionalism. International Organization 58 (2):239–75.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Acharya, Amitav. 2013. The R2P and Norm Diffusion: Towards a Framework of Norm Circulation. Global Responsibility to Protect 5 (4):466–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Adams, Simon. 2012. A Diplomatic Surge for Syria? Huffinton Post, 10 February. Available at <http://www.huffingtonpost.com/simon-adams/a-diplomatic-surge-for-sy_b_1268974.html>..>Google Scholar
Adams, Simon. 2015. Failure to Protect: Syria and the UN Security Council. Global Centre for the Responsibility to Protect. Occasional Paper Series no. 5, March.Google Scholar
Adler, Emanuel. 2005. Communitarian International Relations: The Epistemic Foundations of International Relations. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Adler, Emanuel, and Pouliot, Vincent, eds. 2011. International Practices. New York: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Adler-Nissen, Rebecca, ed. 2013. Bourdieu in International Relations. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Bacon, Michael, 2012. Pragmatism: An Introduction. Cambridge, UK: Polity.Google Scholar
Badescu, Cristina, and Weiss, Thomas. 2010. Misrepresenting R2P and Advancing Norms: An Alternative Spiral? International Studies Perspectives 11 (4):354–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Barkin, Samuel. 2003. Realist Constructivism. International Studies Review 5 (3):325–42.Google Scholar
Barnett, Michael, and Duvall, Raymond. 2005. Power in International Relations. International Organization 59 (1):39–75.Google Scholar
Barnett, Michael, and Weiss, Thomas G.. 2011. Humanitarianism Contested: Where Angels Fear to Tread. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Bauer, Harry, and Brighi, Elisabetta, eds. 2009. Pragmatism in International Relations. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Bellamy, Alex J. 2002. Pragmatic Solidarism and the Dilemmas of Humanitarian Intervention. Millennium 31 (3):473–97.Google Scholar
Black, Ian. 2012. Kofi Annan Attacks Russia and West's “Destructive Competition” Over Syria. The Guardian, 6 July. Available at <https://www.theguardian.com/world/2012/jul/06/kofi-annan-syria-destructive-competition>..' href=https://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=Black,+Ian.+2012.+Kofi+Annan+Attacks+Russia+and+West's+“Destructive+Competition”+Over+Syria.+The+Guardian,+6+July.+Available+at+.>Google Scholar
Borger, Julian. 2013. Protection of Civilians Could Justify Action. The Guardian. 27 August.Google Scholar
Bray, Daniel. 2009. Pragmatic Cosmopolitanism: A Deweyan Approach to Democracy Beyond the Nation-State. Millennium 37 (3):683–719.Google Scholar
Bray, Daniel. 2013. Pragmatic Ethics and the Will to Believe in Cosmopolitanism. International Theory 5 (3): 446–76.Google Scholar
Brown, Chris. 1999. Universal Human Rights: A Critique. In Human Rights in Global Politics, edited by Dunne, Tim and Wheeler, Nicholas, 103–27. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, Chris. 2010. Selective Humanitarianism. In Defence of Inconsistency. In Practical Judgement in International Political Theory, edited by Brown, Chris, 221–35. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Brown, Chris. 2012. The “Practice Turn,” Phronesis and Classical Realism: Towards a Phronetic International Political Theory? Millennium 40 (3):439–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, Matthew. 2013. Science, Values and Democracy in the Global Climate Change Debate. In Philosophical Pragmatism and International Relations, edited by Ralston, Shane, 127–51. Plymouth, UK: Lexington Books.Google Scholar
Carr, Edward H. [1939] 2001. The Twenty Years Crisis 1919–1939. Basingstoke: Palgrave.Google Scholar
Cochran, Molly. 1999. Normative Theory in International Relations: A Pragmatic Approach. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cochran, Molly. 2001. A Pragmatist Perspective on Ethical Foreign Policy. In Ethics and Foreign Policy, edited by Smith, Karen and Light, Margot, 55–72. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cochran, Molly. 2002a. Deweyan Pragmatism and Post-Positivist Social Science in IR. Millennium 31 (3):525–48.Google Scholar
Cochran, Molly. 2002b. A Democratic Critique of Cosmopolitan Democracy: Pragmatism from the Bottom-Up. European Journal of International Relations 8 (4):517–48.Google Scholar
Cochran, Molly. 2010. Dewey as an International Thinker. In The Cambridge Companion to Dewey, edited by Cochran, Molly, 309–36. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Cochran, Molly. 2012. Pragmatism and International Relations: A Story of Closure and Opening. European Journal of Pragmatism and American Philosophy 4 (1):138–58.Google Scholar
Clinton, Hillary, and Gates, Robert. 2011. Interview on CBS's Face the Nation, 27 March.Google Scholar
Coen, Alise. 2017. Capable and Culpable? The United States, RtoP and Refugee Responsibility-Sharing. Ethics and International Affairs 31 (1):1–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Crawford, Neta C. 2002. Argument and Change in World Politics: Ethics, Decolonization, and Humanitarian Intervention. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Dancy, Geoff. 2016. Human Rights Pragmatism: Belief, Inquiry and Action. European Journal of International Relations 22 (3):512–35.Google Scholar
Deen, Phillip. 2013. Justice and Global Communities of Inquiry. In Philosophical Pragmatism and International Relations, edited by Ralston, Shane, 111–26. Plymouth, UK: Lexington Books.Google Scholar
Dewey, John [1908] 1965. Intelligence and Morals. In The Influence of Darwin on Philosophy, and Other Essays in Contemporary Thought, 46–76. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
Dewey, John. [1910] 1965. The Influence of Darwin on Philosophy. In The Influence of Darwin on Philosophy, and Other Essays in Contemporary Thought, 1–19. New York: Henry Holt and Company.Google Scholar
Dewey, John. 1920. Reconstruction in Philosophy. New York: Henry Holt and Company.Google Scholar
Dewey, John. 1927. The Public and Its Problems. London: George Allen and Unwin.Google Scholar
Dewey, John. [1930] 2008. The Construction of Good. In Pragmatism, edited by Malachowski, Alan, 205–23. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Dewey, John. [1931] 2004. The Development of American Pragmatism. In Pragmatism, edited by Malachowski, Alan, 3–16. London: Sage.Google Scholar
Dewey, John. [1932] 1985. Ethics. The Later Works 1925–1933, Vol. 7, edited by Boydston, J.A.. Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press.Google Scholar
Dewey, John. [1937] 2008. Liberalism in Social Action. In The Later Works Vol. 11, edited by Boydston, J.A., 1–66. Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois University Press.Google Scholar
Epstein, Charlotte. 2012. Stop Telling Us How to Behave: Socialization or Infantilization? International Studies Perspectives 13 (2):135–45.Google Scholar
Erskine, Toni. 2008. Embedded Cosmopolitanism: Duties to Strangers and Enemies in a World of “Dislocated Communities.” Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Erskine, Toni. 2012. Whose Progress, Which Morals? Constructivism, Normative IR Theory and the Limits and Possibilities of Studying Ethics in World Politics. International Theory 4 (3):449–68.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Erskine, Toni, and Lebow, Richard Ned, eds. 2012. Tragedy and International Relations. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Evanoff, Richard. 2004. Universalist, Relativist, and Constructivist Approaches to Intercultural Ethics. International Journal of Intercultural Relations 28 (5):439–58.Google Scholar
Evans, Gareth. 2012. The Responsibility to Protect After Libya and Syria. 20 July. Available at: <http://www.responsibilitytoprotect.org/index.php/component/content/article/35-r2pcs-topics/4283-gareth-evans-speech-the-rtop-after-libya-and-syria>..>Google Scholar
Evans, Gareth. 2014. Evans, Gareth. After Syria: the Future of the Responsibility to Protect. 12 March. Available at: <http://www.gevans.org/speeches/speech545.html>..>Google Scholar
Fierke, K.M. 2013. Constructivism. In International Relations Theories. Discipline and Diversity, edited by Dunne, Tim, Kurki, Milja, and Smith, Steve, 187–204. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Finnemore, Martha, and Sikkink, Kathryn. 1998. International Norm Dynamics and Political Change. International Organization 52 (4):887–917.Google Scholar
Friedrichs, Jörg. 2009. From Positivist Pretense to Pragmatic Practice. International Studies Review 11:638–63.Google Scholar
Friedrichs, Jörg, and Kratochwil, Friedrich. 2009. On Acting and Knowing: How Pragmatism Can Advance International Relations Research and Methodology. International Organization 63 (4):701–31.Google Scholar
Frost, Mervyn. 2009. Ethical Competence in International Relations. Ethics and International Affairs 23 (2):91–100.Google Scholar
Gallagher, Adrian. 2015. R2P Ten Years on from the World Summit: A Call to Manage Expectations. Global Responsibility to Protect 7 (3–4):254–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
GCR2P. 2012. R2P Monitor, 10 January.Google Scholar
Guéhenno, Jean-Marie. 2015. The Fog of Peace: A Memoir of International Peacekeeping in the Twenty-first Century. Washington DC: Brooking Institution Press. Kindle edition.Google Scholar
Gurowitz, Amy. 2008. Policy Hypocrisy or Political Compromise? In Moral Limit and Possibility in World Politics, edited by Price, Richard, 138–64. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Haas, Peter M., and Haas, Ernst B.. 2002. Pragmatic Constructivism and the Study of International Institutions. Millennium 31 (3):573–601.Google Scholar
Havercroft, Jonathan. 2008. Sovereignty, Recognition and Indigenous Peoples. In Moral Limit and Possibility in World Politics, edited by Price, Richard, 112–37. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hellmann, Gunther. 2009. Beliefs as Rules of Action: Pragmatism as Theory of Thought and Action. International Studies Review 11: 638–63.Google Scholar
Hildebrand, David. 2013. Dewey's Pragmatism: Instrumentalism and Meliorism. In Cambridge Companion to Pragmatism, edited by Malachowski, Alan, 55–80. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Hildreth, R.W. 2009. Reconstructing Dewey on Power. Political Theory 37 (6):780–807.Google Scholar
Hoffmann, Matthew J. 2009. Is Constructivist Ethics an Oxymoron? International Studies Review 11 (2): 231–52.Google Scholar
Honneth, Axel, and Farrell, John. 1998. Democracy as Reflexive Cooperation: John Dewey and the Theory of Democracy Today. Political Theory 26 (6):763–83.Google Scholar
Hookway, Christopher. 2013. “The Principle of Peirce” and the Origins of Pragmatism. In The Cambridge Companion to Pragmatism, edited by Malachowski, Alan, 17–35. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hoover, Joseph. 2016. Reconstructing Human Rights: A Pragmatic and Pluralist Inquiry in Global Ethics. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Hopf, Ted. 1998. The Promise of Constructivism in International Relations Theory. International Security 23 (1):171–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty (ICISS). 2001. The Responsibility to Protect. Ottawa: International Development Research Centre.Google Scholar
Isacoff, Jonathan. 2002. On the Historical Imagination of International Relations: The Case for a “Deweyan Reconstruction.” Millennium 31 (3):603–26.Google Scholar
Job, Brian, and Shesterinina, Anastasia. 2014. China as a Global Norm-Shaper: Institutionalization and Implementation of the Responsibility to Protect. In Implementation and World Politics: How International Norms Change Practice, edited by Betts, Alexander and Orchard, Phil, 144–59. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
James, William. [1896] 2005. The Will to Believe. In James and Dewey on Belief and Experience, edited by Capps, John M. and Capps, Donald. Urbana and Chicago: University of Illinois Press. Kindle edition.Google Scholar
Kaag, John. 2013. Pragmatism, Militarism, and Political Unity. In Philosophical Pragmatism and International Relations, edited by Ralston, Shane, 71–85. Plymouth, UK: Lexington Books.Google Scholar
Kaag, John, and Kreps, Sarah. 2012. Pragmatism's Contributions to International Relations. Cambridge Review of International Affairs 25 (2):191–208.Google Scholar
Kenkel, Kai, and Stefan, Cristina. 2016. Brazil and the Responsibility While Protecting Initiative: Norms and the Timing of Diplomatic Support. Global Governance 22 (1):41–58.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kennan, George. 1952. American Diplomacy, 1900–1950. London: Secker and Warburg.Google Scholar
Ki-Moon, Ban. 2014. Framework of Analysis for Atrocity Crimes: A Tool for Prevention. United Nations. Available at: <http://www.un.org/en/preventgenocide/adviser/pdf/framework%20of%20analysis%20for%20atrocity%20crimes_en.pdf>..>Google Scholar
Kratochwil, Friedrich. 2009. Ten Points to Ponder About Pragmatism. In Pragmatism in International Relations, edited by Bauer, Harry and Brighi, Elisabetta, 11–25. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Kratochwil, Friedrich. 2011. Making Sense of International Practices. In International Practices, edited by Adler, Emanuel and Pouliot, Vincent, 36–60. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Lachs, John. 2005. Stoic Pragmatism. The Journal of Speculative Philosophy 19 (2):95–106.Google Scholar
Lebow, Richard Ned. 2012. Tragedy, Politics and Political Science. In Tragedy and International Relations, edited by Erskine, Toni and Lebow, Richard Ned, 63–71. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
Lynch, Marc. 2002. Why Engage? China and the Logic of Communicative Engagement. European Journal of International Relations 8 (2):187–230.Google Scholar
Lynch, Marc. 2008. Lie to Me: Sanctions on Iraq, Moral Argument and the International Politics of Hypocrisy. In Moral Limit and Possibility in World Politics, edited by Price, Richard, 165–96. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Malachowski, Alan. 2013. James's Holism: The Human Continuum. In The Cambridge Companion to Pragmatism, edited by Malachowski, Alan, 36–54. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
McKeown, Ryder. 2009. Norm Regress: US Revisionism and the Slow Death of the Torture Norm. International Relations 23 (1):5–25.Google Scholar
Morgenthau, Hans. [1946] 1974. Scientific Man Versus Power Politics. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Morgenthau, Hans. 1948. Politics Among Nations: The Struggle for Power and Peace. New York: Knopf.Google Scholar
Morgenthau, Hans. 1952. American Foreign Policy: A Critical Examination. London: Methuen.Google Scholar
Niebuhr, Reinhold. [1932] 2001. Moral Man and Immoral Society: A Study of Ethics and Politics. London: John Knox Press.Google Scholar
Nyman, Jonna. 2016. What Is the Value of Security? Contextualising the Negative/Positive Debate. Review of International Studies 42 (5):821–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Owen, David. 2002. Re-orienting International Relations: On Pragmatism, Pluralism and Practical Reasoning. Millennium 31 (3):653–73.Google Scholar
Price, Richard. 2008a. The Ethics of Constructivism. In The Oxford Handbook of International Relations, edited by Reus-Smit, Christian and Snidal, Duncan, 317–27. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Price, Richard. 2008b. Moral Limit and Possibility in World Politics. In Moral Limit and Possibiltiy in World Politics, edited by Price, Richard, 1–52. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Price, Richard. 2008c. Moral Limit and Possibility in World Politics. International Organization 62 (2):191–220.Google Scholar
Price, Richard. 2008d. Progress with a Price. In Moral Limit and Possibility in World Politics, edited by Price, Richard, 281–304. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Price, Richard, and Reus-Smit, Christian. 1998. Dangerous Liaisons? Critical International Theory and Constructivism. European Journal of International Relations 4 (3):259–94.Google Scholar
Pouliot, Vincent. 2008. The Logic of Practicality. A Theory of Practice of Security Communities. International Organization 62 (2):257–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Putnam, Hilary. 1995. Pragmatism: An Open Question. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Ralph, Jason. 2016. The International Criminal Court. In The Oxford Handbook of the Responsibility to Protect, edited by Bellamy, Alex and Dunne, Tim, 638–54 . Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Ralph, Jason, and Gallagher, Adrian. 2015. Legitimacy Faultlines in International Society: The Responsibility to Protect and Prosecute After Libya. Review of International Studies 41 (3):553–73.Google Scholar
Ralph, Jason, and Gifkins, Jess. 2017. The Purpose of Security Council Practice: Contesting Competence Claims in the Normative Context Created by the Responsibility to Protect. European Journal of International Relations 23 (3):630–53.Google Scholar
Ralph, Jason, Holland, Jack, and Zhekova, Kalina. 2017. Before the Vote: UK Foreign Policy Discourse on Syria 2011–2013. Review of International Studies. Published online 15 May 2017 <https://doi.org/10.1017/S0260210517000134>.CrossRef.>Google Scholar
Ralph, Jason, and Souter, James. 2015. A Special Responsibility to Protect: The UK, Australia and the Rise of Islamic State. International Affairs 91 (4):709–23.Google Scholar
Ralph, Jason, and Souter, James. 2017. Introduction: The Responsibility to Protect and the Refugee Protection Regime. Ethics and International Affairs 31 (1):47–50.Google Scholar
Ralston, Shane. 2013. Introduction. In Philosophical Pragmatism and International Relations, edited by Ralston, Shane, 9–23. Plymouth, UK: Lexington Books.Google Scholar
Rieff, David. 2011. R2P, R.I.P New York Times, 7 November.Google Scholar
Rengger, Nicholas. 2012a. Progress with Price? International Theory 4 (3):468–77.Google Scholar
Rengger, Nicholas. 2012b. Tragedy or Scepticism? Defending the Anti-Pelagian Mind in World Politics. In Tragedy and International Relations, edited by Erskine, Toni and Lebow, Richard Ned, 53–62. Basingstoke, UK: Palgrave.Google Scholar
Reus-Smit, Christian. 2008. Constructivism and the Structure of Ethical Reasoning. In Moral Limit and Possibility in World Politics, edited by Price, Richard, 53–82. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Rice, Susan. 2012. Foreign Policy Interviews US Ambassador at the Core club, 6 February. Turtle Bay [blog]. Available at <http://columlynch.tumblr.com/post/17390479529/foreig-policy-interviews-susan-rice-at-the-core>..>Google Scholar
Roff, Heather. 2013. Global Justice, Kant and the Responsibility to Protect: A Provisional Study. Abingdon, UK: Routledge.Google Scholar
Rorty, Richard. 1989. Contingency, Irony, and Solidarity. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Russell, Bertrand. 1919. Professor Dewey's “Essays in Experimental Logic.” The Journal of Philosophy, Psychology and Scientific Methods 16 (1):5–26.Google Scholar
Rytövuori-Apunen, Helena. 2005. Forget “Post-Positivist” IR: The Legacy of IR Theory as the Locus for a Pragmatist Turn. Cooperation and Conflict 40 (2):147–77.Google Scholar
Rytövuori-Apunen, Helena. 2009. Abstractive Observation as the Key to the “Primacy of Practice.” International Studies Review 11: 641–45.Google Scholar
Sengupta, Kim. 2012. Will the World Ever Step in to Stop the Syrian Slaughter? The Independent, 11 June. <http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/will-the-world-ever-step-in-to-stop-the-syrian-slaughter-7837039.html>..>Google Scholar
Ruth, Sherlock, and Spencer, Richard. 2012. Clinton Piles the Pressure on Russia to Avert Civil War After Ship Docks with Cargo of Weapons. The Daily Telegraph, 1 June.Google Scholar
Shields, Patricia, and Soeters, Joseph. 2013. Pragmatism, Peacekeeping, and the Constabulary Force. In Philosophical Pragmatism and International Relations, edited by Ralston, Shane, 87–110. Plymouth, UK: Lexington Books.Google Scholar
Sikkink, Kathryn. 2008. The Role of Consequences, Comparison and Counterfactuals in Constructivist Ethical Thought. In Moral Limit and Possibility in World Poltics, edited by Price, Richard, 83–111. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Sikkink, Kathryn. 2013. The United States and Torture: Does the Spiral Model Work? In The Persistent Power of Human Rights: From Commitment to Compliance, edited by Risse, Thomas, Ropp, Stephen, and Sikkink, Kathryn, 145–63. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Towns, Ann. 2008. Inevitable Inequalities? Approaching Gender Equality and Multiculturalism. In Moral Limit and Possibility in World Politics, edited by Price, Richard, 225–52. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
United Nations. 2011. France, Germany, Portugal and United Kingdom: Draft Resolution. S/2011/612. 4 October.Google Scholar
United Nations. 2012a. S/PV.6711. Meeting of the Security Council. 4 February.Google Scholar
United Nations. 2012b. S/PV.6810. Meeting of the Security Council. 19 July.Google Scholar
United Nations. 2013. Report of the Secretary General. Responsibility to Protect: State Responsibility and Prevention A/67/929-S/2013/399, 9 July.Google Scholar
Walt, Stephen. 2016. Obama Was Not a Realist President. Foreign Policy, 7 April.Google Scholar
Weber, Eric Thomas. 2013. On Pragmatism and International Relations. In Philosophical Pragmatism and International Relations, edited by Ralston, Shane, 25–50. New York: Lexington Books.Google Scholar
Welsh, Jennifer. 2011. A Normative Case for Pluralism: Reassessing Vincent's Views on Humanitarian Intervention. International Affairs 87 (5):1193–1204.Google Scholar
Welsh, Jennifer. 2013. Norm Contestation and R2P. Global Responsibility to Protect 5 (4):365–96.Google Scholar
Welsh, Jennifer. 2014a. Fortress Europe and R2P: Framing the Issue. In The “Lampedusa Dilemma,” edited by EUI Forum on Migration. Florence: EUI. Available at: <https://www.eui.eu/Documents/RSCAS/PapersLampedusa/FORUM-Welshfinal.pdf>.Google Scholar
Welsh, Jennifer. 2014b. Implementing the Responsibility to Protect. In Implementation and World Politics: How International Norms Change Practice, edited by Betts, Alexander and Orchard, Phil, 122–43. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Western, Jon, and Goldstein, Joshua S.. 2013. R2P after Syria: To Save the Doctrine, Forget Regime Change. Foreign Affairs, 26 March.Google Scholar
Wheeler, Nicholas. 2002. Saving Strangers: Humanitarian Intervention in International Society. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Widmaier, Wesley 2004. Theory as a Factor and the Theorist as an Actor: The “Pragmatist Constructivist” Lessons of John Dewey and John Kenneth Galbraith. International Studies Review 6 (3):427–45.Google Scholar
Widmaier, Wesley, and Glanville, Luke. 2015. The Benefits of Norm Ambiguity: Constructing the Responsibility to Protect Across Rwanda, Iraq and Libya. Contemporary Politics 21 (4):367–83.Google Scholar
Wiener, Antje. 2004. Contested Compliance: Interventions on the Normative Structure of World Politics. European Journal of International Relations 10 (2):189–234.Google Scholar
Wiener, Antje. 2009. Enacting Meaning-in-Use: Qualitative Research on Norms and International Relations. Review of International Studies 35 (1):175–93.Google Scholar
Wiener, Antje. 2014. A Theory of Contestation. Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
Wiener, Antje, and Puetter, Uwe. 2009. Quality of Norms Is What Actors Make of It: Critical–Constructivist Research on Norms. Journal of International Law and International Relations 5 (1):1–16.Google Scholar
Wolfe, Joel. 2012. Does Pragmatism Have a Theory of Power? European Journal of Pragmatism and American Philosophy 4 (1):120–37.Google Scholar