Responsibility to Protect goes to China: An interpretivist analysis of how China’s coexistence policy made it a Responsibility to Protect insider

The article offers an interpretivist analysis of China’s coexistence approach to developing the Responsibility to Protect norm concerning atrocity crimes against civilians. The English school’s concept of great power legitimacy through coexistence is a central characteristic of its international soc...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of international political theory 2020-06, Vol.16 (2), p.231-248
1. Verfasser: Odgaard, Liselotte
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 248
container_issue 2
container_start_page 231
container_title Journal of international political theory
container_volume 16
creator Odgaard, Liselotte
description The article offers an interpretivist analysis of China’s coexistence approach to developing the Responsibility to Protect norm concerning atrocity crimes against civilians. The English school’s concept of great power legitimacy through coexistence is a central characteristic of its international society description of the international realm. The article uses an interpretivist approach to show how China’s coexistence foreign policy tradition was challenged by the liberal internationalist agenda of a Responsibility to Protect norm on atrocity crimes against civilians. The emergence of an alternative Chinese Responsibility to Protect concept coupling a state-centric and a people-centric approach with its focus on political and economic capacity-building of existing domestic institutions allowed China to position itself as a legitimate lifeline of liberal international institutions. The article shows how an illiberal state can become a prominent upholder of central institutions of the post-World War II liberal international order.
doi_str_mv 10.1177/1755088219899416
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_2401741738</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sage_id>10.1177_1755088219899416</sage_id><sourcerecordid>2401741738</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c309t-a04f1466da14afdeb01859ce5a5201dd4955a1d711f23a87b9cb27a4db25e8d53</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kE1LAzEQhoMoWKt3jwHPq5ndpMl6K8UvKCii5yW7mW1T2s2apOre_A-e_Hv-ErdUEISe5ut532GGkFNg5wBSXoAUgimVQq7ynMNojww2rQRkmu7_5pv5ITkKYcHYiCuhBuTzEUPrmmBLu7Sxo9HRB-8iVpHOHIZNPZnbRl_ScUNtE9G3HqN9tSFS3ehlF2ygrqZz97YFvz--Aq0cvvcENhXS1i1t1dGVNkhtL6K7N9q-a9Afk4NaLwOe_MYheb6-eprcJtP7m7vJeJpUGctjohmvgY9GRgPXtcGSgRJ5hUKLlIExPBdCg5EAdZppJcu8KlOpuSlTgcqIbEjOtr6tdy9rDLFYuLXvjwpFyhlIDjJTPcW2VOVdCB7rovV2pX1XACs2ry_-v76XJFtJ0DP8M93J_wBMFoc3</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2401741738</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Responsibility to Protect goes to China: An interpretivist analysis of how China’s coexistence policy made it a Responsibility to Protect insider</title><source>SAGE Complete A-Z List</source><source>Worldwide Political Science Abstracts</source><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><creator>Odgaard, Liselotte</creator><creatorcontrib>Odgaard, Liselotte</creatorcontrib><description>The article offers an interpretivist analysis of China’s coexistence approach to developing the Responsibility to Protect norm concerning atrocity crimes against civilians. The English school’s concept of great power legitimacy through coexistence is a central characteristic of its international society description of the international realm. The article uses an interpretivist approach to show how China’s coexistence foreign policy tradition was challenged by the liberal internationalist agenda of a Responsibility to Protect norm on atrocity crimes against civilians. The emergence of an alternative Chinese Responsibility to Protect concept coupling a state-centric and a people-centric approach with its focus on political and economic capacity-building of existing domestic institutions allowed China to position itself as a legitimate lifeline of liberal international institutions. The article shows how an illiberal state can become a prominent upholder of central institutions of the post-World War II liberal international order.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1755-0882</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1755-1722</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1177/1755088219899416</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>London, England: SAGE Publications</publisher><subject>Atrocities ; Foreign policy ; Institution building ; Internationalism ; Legitimacy ; Offenses ; Political institutions ; Post World War II period ; Protection of civilians ; Responsibility</subject><ispartof>Journal of international political theory, 2020-06, Vol.16 (2), p.231-248</ispartof><rights>The Author(s) 2020</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c309t-a04f1466da14afdeb01859ce5a5201dd4955a1d711f23a87b9cb27a4db25e8d53</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c309t-a04f1466da14afdeb01859ce5a5201dd4955a1d711f23a87b9cb27a4db25e8d53</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-3244-4920</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/1755088219899416$$EPDF$$P50$$Gsage$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1755088219899416$$EHTML$$P50$$Gsage$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,21798,27901,27902,43597,43598</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Odgaard, Liselotte</creatorcontrib><title>Responsibility to Protect goes to China: An interpretivist analysis of how China’s coexistence policy made it a Responsibility to Protect insider</title><title>Journal of international political theory</title><description>The article offers an interpretivist analysis of China’s coexistence approach to developing the Responsibility to Protect norm concerning atrocity crimes against civilians. The English school’s concept of great power legitimacy through coexistence is a central characteristic of its international society description of the international realm. The article uses an interpretivist approach to show how China’s coexistence foreign policy tradition was challenged by the liberal internationalist agenda of a Responsibility to Protect norm on atrocity crimes against civilians. The emergence of an alternative Chinese Responsibility to Protect concept coupling a state-centric and a people-centric approach with its focus on political and economic capacity-building of existing domestic institutions allowed China to position itself as a legitimate lifeline of liberal international institutions. The article shows how an illiberal state can become a prominent upholder of central institutions of the post-World War II liberal international order.</description><subject>Atrocities</subject><subject>Foreign policy</subject><subject>Institution building</subject><subject>Internationalism</subject><subject>Legitimacy</subject><subject>Offenses</subject><subject>Political institutions</subject><subject>Post World War II period</subject><subject>Protection of civilians</subject><subject>Responsibility</subject><issn>1755-0882</issn><issn>1755-1722</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2020</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>7UB</sourceid><recordid>eNp1kE1LAzEQhoMoWKt3jwHPq5ndpMl6K8UvKCii5yW7mW1T2s2apOre_A-e_Hv-ErdUEISe5ut532GGkFNg5wBSXoAUgimVQq7ynMNojww2rQRkmu7_5pv5ITkKYcHYiCuhBuTzEUPrmmBLu7Sxo9HRB-8iVpHOHIZNPZnbRl_ScUNtE9G3HqN9tSFS3ehlF2ygrqZz97YFvz--Aq0cvvcENhXS1i1t1dGVNkhtL6K7N9q-a9Afk4NaLwOe_MYheb6-eprcJtP7m7vJeJpUGctjohmvgY9GRgPXtcGSgRJ5hUKLlIExPBdCg5EAdZppJcu8KlOpuSlTgcqIbEjOtr6tdy9rDLFYuLXvjwpFyhlIDjJTPcW2VOVdCB7rovV2pX1XACs2ry_-v76XJFtJ0DP8M93J_wBMFoc3</recordid><startdate>202006</startdate><enddate>202006</enddate><creator>Odgaard, Liselotte</creator><general>SAGE Publications</general><general>Sage Publications Ltd</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7UB</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3244-4920</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>202006</creationdate><title>Responsibility to Protect goes to China: An interpretivist analysis of how China’s coexistence policy made it a Responsibility to Protect insider</title><author>Odgaard, Liselotte</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c309t-a04f1466da14afdeb01859ce5a5201dd4955a1d711f23a87b9cb27a4db25e8d53</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2020</creationdate><topic>Atrocities</topic><topic>Foreign policy</topic><topic>Institution building</topic><topic>Internationalism</topic><topic>Legitimacy</topic><topic>Offenses</topic><topic>Political institutions</topic><topic>Post World War II period</topic><topic>Protection of civilians</topic><topic>Responsibility</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Odgaard, Liselotte</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Worldwide Political Science Abstracts</collection><jtitle>Journal of international political theory</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Odgaard, Liselotte</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Responsibility to Protect goes to China: An interpretivist analysis of how China’s coexistence policy made it a Responsibility to Protect insider</atitle><jtitle>Journal of international political theory</jtitle><date>2020-06</date><risdate>2020</risdate><volume>16</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>231</spage><epage>248</epage><pages>231-248</pages><issn>1755-0882</issn><eissn>1755-1722</eissn><abstract>The article offers an interpretivist analysis of China’s coexistence approach to developing the Responsibility to Protect norm concerning atrocity crimes against civilians. The English school’s concept of great power legitimacy through coexistence is a central characteristic of its international society description of the international realm. The article uses an interpretivist approach to show how China’s coexistence foreign policy tradition was challenged by the liberal internationalist agenda of a Responsibility to Protect norm on atrocity crimes against civilians. The emergence of an alternative Chinese Responsibility to Protect concept coupling a state-centric and a people-centric approach with its focus on political and economic capacity-building of existing domestic institutions allowed China to position itself as a legitimate lifeline of liberal international institutions. The article shows how an illiberal state can become a prominent upholder of central institutions of the post-World War II liberal international order.</abstract><cop>London, England</cop><pub>SAGE Publications</pub><doi>10.1177/1755088219899416</doi><tpages>18</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3244-4920</orcidid></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1755-0882
ispartof Journal of international political theory, 2020-06, Vol.16 (2), p.231-248
issn 1755-0882
1755-1722
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_journals_2401741738
source SAGE Complete A-Z List; Worldwide Political Science Abstracts; Alma/SFX Local Collection
subjects Atrocities
Foreign policy
Institution building
Internationalism
Legitimacy
Offenses
Political institutions
Post World War II period
Protection of civilians
Responsibility
title Responsibility to Protect goes to China: An interpretivist analysis of how China’s coexistence policy made it a Responsibility to Protect insider
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-05T02%3A54%3A25IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Responsibility%20to%20Protect%20goes%20to%20China:%20An%20interpretivist%20analysis%20of%20how%20China%E2%80%99s%20coexistence%20policy%20made%20it%20a%20Responsibility%20to%20Protect%20insider&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20international%20political%20theory&rft.au=Odgaard,%20Liselotte&rft.date=2020-06&rft.volume=16&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=231&rft.epage=248&rft.pages=231-248&rft.issn=1755-0882&rft.eissn=1755-1722&rft_id=info:doi/10.1177/1755088219899416&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2401741738%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2401741738&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_sage_id=10.1177_1755088219899416&rfr_iscdi=true