IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/asseca/v7y2020i3p370-386.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Russian Stand on the Responsibility to Protect: Does Strategic Culture Matter?

Author

Listed:
  • Dogachan Dagi

Abstract

Though Russia has approved the doctrine of responsibility to protect (R2P) in the UN platforms it has often been placed rightly in the ‘sceptics group’ of states that are not at ease with the premises and practices of R2P. What is the basis of the Russian discontent? This article suggests the relevance of strategic culture in explaining the Russian position on R2P. It is based on the assertion that, in addition to humanitarian and moral aspects, responding to mass atrocities within the doctrine of R2P takes place in a context of security considerations since, in severe cases, it involves, among others, a military component under a UN Security Council mandate. As such the use of force, approving or disapproving, it is all related to the realm of security even if the motive and objective may be humanitarian. In the security domain, this article argues that Russian strategic culture, in interaction with its national identity, historical experiences and prevailing narratives, forms a loose code of conduct and a context within which strategic decisions concerning the use of force in responding to a humanitarian crisis are made. It is, thus, concluded that Russian strategic culture by constraining decision-makers, defining appropriate behaviour and reflecting insecurities and aspirations explains Russia’s approach to R2P’s normative propositions, legal standing and implementation in practice.

Suggested Citation

  • Dogachan Dagi, 2020. "The Russian Stand on the Responsibility to Protect: Does Strategic Culture Matter?," Journal of Asian Security and International Affairs, , vol. 7(3), pages 370-386, December.
  • Handle: RePEc:sae:asseca:v:7:y:2020:i:3:p:370-386
    DOI: 10.1177/2347797020962667
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/2347797020962667
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1177/2347797020962667?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. David G. Lewis, 2018. "Geopolitical Imaginaries in Russian Foreign Policy: The Evolution of ‘Greater Eurasia’," Europe-Asia Studies, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 70(10), pages 1612-1637, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Athanasios Stathopoulos, 2022. "Post-Intervention Reconstruction and the Responsibility to Rebuild," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 11(8), pages 1-14, August.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.

      Corrections

      All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:asseca:v:7:y:2020:i:3:p:370-386. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

      If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

      If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

      If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

      For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

      Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

      IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.