How do Latin American States Engage with Responsibility to Protect Norms? A Typology of Positions

Abstract

Within the discourse surrounding the Responsibility to Protect (R2P), scholars have typically categorized the stakeholders as either proponents or staunch detractors, commonly referring to them as R2P ‘champions’ and ‘anti-preneurs,’ respectively. However, there is a significant gap in the existing research devoted to comprehending the nuanced positions adopted by states that fall within the spectrum between these two extremes. This article offers a comprehensive exploration of Latin American states’ stances concerning R2P norms and provides a typology based on their level of engagement with and degree of support for R2P norms. While certain states overtly contest the legitimacy of R2P, perceiving it as a pretext for external intervention, others challenge existing perceptions of how R2P should be practically implemented. To understand these diverse perspectives, the article differentiates contestation of the R2P norms themselves from contestation of the implementation mechanisms. Through an empirical analysis, it explores various Latin American countries’ perspectives on R2P from 2005 to 2023, highlighting their proposals like the Brazilian Responsibility while Protecting, as well as Costa Rica and Mexico’s contributions to the Responsibility Not to Veto initiatives. By unraveling the complexities of R2P contestation in Latin America, this article expands our understanding of how diverse regional perspectives shape and inf luence the advancement of R2P norms.