Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Theory and Methods

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
R2P and the US Intervention in Libya

  • 1060 Accesses

Abstract

This chapter deals with the theory and methods used to assess the impact of Responsibility to Protect (R2P) in the decision to intervene. Since R2P is a norm, constructivism offers a better approach that helps us situate the debate within the context of international relations theories. Constructivism argues that material capabilities matter, but the extent to which they matter depends on norms, ideas, beliefs, and shared expectations. These collective meanings set the standard of what is appropriate and acceptable behavior in international politics. R2P and human rights norms have radically transformed the purpose of military intervention. The chapter ends with the methods and sources used to assess the degree to which R2P influenced the US decision to intervene in Libya.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 49.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 64.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 89.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  • Adler, E. 1997. Seizing the middle ground: Constructivism in world politics. European Journal of International Relations 3 (3): 319–363.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Adler, E., and M. Barnett. 1998. Security communities in theoretical perspective. In Security communities, ed. E. Adler and M. Barnett, 3–28. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Barkin, S. 2003. Realists constructivism. International Studies Review 5 (3): 325–342.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Beitz, C. 1999. Political theory and international relations. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Benn, S.I., and R.I. Peters. 1965. The principles of political thought: Social principles and the democratic state. New York: Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Buchanan, A. 2004. Justice, legitimacy and self-determination. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Checkel, J. 1997. International norms and domestic politics: Bridging the rationalist–constructivist divide. European Journal of International Relations 3 (4): 473–495.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2008. Process tracing. In Qualitative methods in international relations: A pluralist guide, ed. A. Klotz and D. Prakash, 115–127. Basingtoke: Palgrave.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cohen, I. 1987. Structuration theory and social praxis. In Social theory today, ed. A. Giddens and A.J. Turner. Stanford: Stanford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Deng, F., and T. Lyons. 1996. Sovereignty as responsibility: Conflict management in Africa. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Doppelt, G. 1978. Walzer’s theory of morality in international relations. Philosophy & Public Affairs 8 (1): 3–26.

    Google Scholar 

  • Etzioni, A. 2006. Sovereignty as responsibility. Foreign Policy Research Institute Journal 50: 71–85.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fearon, J., and A. Wendt. 2012. Rationalism v. constructivism: A skeptical view. In Handbook of international relations, ed. W. Carlsnaes et al. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Finnemore, M. 1996. Constructing norms of humanitarian intervention. In The culture of national security, norms and identity in world politics, ed. P. Katzenstein, 153–185. New York: Columbia University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2003. The purpose of intervention. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gates, R. 2014. Duty: Memoirs of a secretary at war. New York: Alfred Knopf.

    Google Scholar 

  • George, L., and A. Bennett. 2005. Case studies and theory development in social sciences. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Goldstein, J.S. 2005. International relations. New York: Pearson Longman.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hurd, I. 1999. Legitimacy and authority in international politics. International Organization 53: 379–408.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2010. Constructivism. In The Oxford handbook of international relations, ed. C. Reus-Smidt and D. Snidal. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • ICISS. 2001. The responsibility to protect. Ottawa: International Development Research Center.

    Google Scholar 

  • Johnson, D., and R. Johnson. 2000. Secular political discourse in a democracy: The contribution of psychology. www.co-operation.org/pages/contro-pol.html.

  • Keating, T. 2002. Canada and world order: The multilateralist tradition in Canadian foreign policy. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Klotz, Audie. 1995. Norms in international relations: The struggle against apartheid. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Knight, A. 2001. Soft power, moral suasion, and establishing the international criminal court. In Ethics and security in Canadian foreign policy, ed. Rosalind Irwin. Vancouver: UBC Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Krasner, S. 1999. Sovereignty: Organized hypocrisy. Princeton: Princeton University Press.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Legro, J. 1996. Culture and preferences in the international cooperation two-step. American Political Science Review 90: 118–137.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2005. Rethinking the world: Great power strategies and international order. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Locke, J. 1986. The Second treatise on civil government. Amherst, NY: Prometheus Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Lupovici, Amir. 2009. Constructivist methods: A plea and manifesto for pluralism. Review of International Studies 35 (1): 195–218.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • March, J.G., and J.-P. Olsen. 1998. The institutional dynamics of international political order. International Organization 52: 943–969.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller, D. 2004. Holding nations responsible. Ethics 114 (2): 240–268.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2005. Defending political autonomy: A discussion of Charles Beitz. Review of International Studies 31: 381–388.

    Google Scholar 

  • Moellendorf, D. 2002. Cosmopolitan justice. Boulder, CO: Westview Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Nagel, T. 2005. The problem of global justice. Philosophy & Public Affairs 33 (2): 113–147.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Neumann, I.B. 2008. Discourse analysis. In Qualitative methods in international relations: A pluralist guide, ed. A. Klotz and D. Prakash, 61–77. Basingtoke: Palgrave.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Onuf, N. 1989. World of our making. Columbia: University of South Carolina Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Price R., and C. Reus-Smit. 1998. Dangerous liaisons? Critical international theory and constructivism. European Journal of International Relations 4 (3): 259–294.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Price, R., and N. Tannenwald. 1996. Norms and deterrence: The nuclear and chemical weapons. In The culture of national security, norms and identity in world politics, ed. P. Katzenstein, 115–152. New York: Columbia University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Reisman, M. 2000. Unilateral action and the transformation of the world constitutive process: The special problem of humanitarian intervention. European Journal of International Law 11: 3–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rome Statute of the ICC. 1998. A/CONF.183/9 of 17 July 1998. https://www.icc-cpi.int/nr/rdonlyres/ea9aeff7-5752-4f84-be94 0a655eb30e16/0/rome_statute_english.pdf.

  • Ruggie, J. 1998. What makes the world hang together? Neo-utilitarianism and the social constructivist challenge. International Organization 52: 855–885.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Slaughter, A.-M. 2005. Security, solidarity, and sovereignty: The grand themes of U.N. reform. The American Journal of International Law 99: 619–631.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Snidal, D., and A. Thompson. 2003. International commitments and domestic politics: Institutions and actors at two levels. In Locating the proper authorities: The interaction of domestic and international institutions, ed. D. Drezner, 197–230. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Sterling-Folker, J. 2000. Competing paradigms or birds of a feather? Constructivism and neoliberal institutionalism compared. International Studies Quarterly 44: 97–119.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tomlin, B., Norman Hillier, and Fen O. Hampson. 2007. Canada’s international policies: Agendas, alternatives and politics. Toronto: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • UN Secretary General. 2004. High level panel on threats challenges and change, a more secure world: Our shared responsibility. http://www.un.org/secureworld/report.pdf.

  • UN Security Council. 2007. Civilians in armed conflict. Doc. S/PV.5703, June 22.

    Google Scholar 

  • U.S. Congress. 2011. Document S. HRG. 112–162, Operation Odyssey Dawn and the situation in Libya. Committee on Armed Services, U.S. Senate, March 31.

    Google Scholar 

  • Van Dijk, T.A. 1997. What is political discourse analysis? In Political linguistics, ed. Jan Blommaert and Chris Bulcaen. http://www.discourses.org/OldArticles/What%20is%20Political%20Discourse%20Analysis.pdf.

  • Van Evera, S. 1997. Guide to methods for students of political science, 64–65. Ithaca, NY: Cornell University.

    Google Scholar 

  • Walzer, M. 1977. Just and unjust wars. New York: Basic Books.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weber, M. 1968. Economy and society. New York: Bedminster.

    Google Scholar 

  • Wendt, A. 1992. Anarchy is what states make of it: The social construction of power politics. International Organization 46 (2): 391–426.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • ———. 1999. Social theory of international politics. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • ———. 2000. On the via media: A response to the critics. Review of International Studies 26 (1): 165–180.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Political Science, Hekima Institute of Peace Studies and International Relations, Nairobi, Kenya

    Paul Tang Abomo

Authors
  1. Paul Tang Abomo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Paul Tang Abomo .

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 The Author(s)

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Tang Abomo, P. (2019). Theory and Methods. In: R2P and the US Intervention in Libya. Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-78831-9_3

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation