
Статья поступила 11.10.2023. После доработки 03.11.2023. Принята к печати 24.01.2024.
Аннотация. В статье рассматриваются подходы стран БРИКС к концепции “Ответственность по защите”. Авторы пытаются понять, может ли геополитическая система способствовать обновлению и переосмыслению этой доктрины, обеспечивая тем самым ее бóльшую эффективность. Качественное исследование основано на изучении интервью, проведенных с экспертами из стран БРИКС и некоторых государств Запада. Полученные результаты показывают, что если странам-участницам удастся выработать общую концептуальную точку зрения, то “Ответственность по защите” может быть признана во всем мире. Вместе с тем новые ограничения по ее имплементации, за которые выступают страны БРИКС, могут затруднить проведение интервенций в целях защиты прав человека.
Ключевые слова: “Ответственность по защите”, БРИКС, деколонизация, Руанда, международные нормы
СПИСОК ЛИТЕРАТУРЫ
1. Hobson C. The Moral Untouchability of the Responsibility to Protect. Journal of Intervention and Statebuilding, 2022, vol. 16, no. 3, pp. 368-385. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/17502977.2021.2015146
2. Tiwari V.K. An Appraisal of Responsibility to Protect as an Evolving Norm in International Law: A TWAIL Critique. International Journal of Law Management and Humanities, 2022, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 1587-1600. Available at: https://doij.org/10.10000/IJLMH.112688
3. Hoffmann M.J. Norms and Social Constructivism in International Relations. Oxford Research Encyclopedia of International Studies, 2017. Available at: https://oxfordre.com/internationalstudies/display/10.1093/acrefore/9780190846626.001.0001/acrefore-9780190846626-e-60 (accessed 29.09.2023).
4. Finnemore M., Sikkink K. International Norm Dynamics and Political Change. International Organization, 1998, vol. 52, no. 4, pp. 887-918.
5. Nadelmann E. Global Prohibition Regimes: The Evolution of Norms in International Society. International Organization, 1990, vol. 44, no. 4, pp. 479-526.
6. Виньо А., Байков А., Калюжнова Е. Российское высшее образование в условиях санкций: конструктивистский взгляд. Полис. Политические исследования, 2022, № 4, сс. 47-62.
Crowley-Vigneau A., Baykov A., Kalyuzhnova Y. Russian Higher Education under Sanctions: a Constructivist Perspective. Polis. Political Studies, 2022, no. 4, pp. 47-62. (In Russ.) Available at: https://doi.org/10.17976/jpps/2022.04.05
7. Crowley-Vigneau A., Kalyuzhnova Y., Baykov A. World-Class Universities in Russia: a Contested Norm and Its Implementation. Journal of Studies in International Education, 2022, vol. 27, no. 3, pp. 539-556. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1177/10283153221105322
8. McAdam D., McCarthy J.D., Zald M.N., eds. Comparative Perspectives on Social Movements: Political Opportunities, Mobilizing Structures, and Cultural Framings. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1996. 426 p.
9. Katzenstein P.J., Keohane R.O., Krasner S.D., eds. Exploration and Contestation in the Study of World Politics. Cambridge, MIT press, 1999. 324 p.
10. Risse T., Ropp S.C., Sikkink K., eds. The Power of Human Rights: International Norms and Domestic Change. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1999. 338 p. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511598777
11. Panke D., Petersohn U. Norm Challenges and Norm Death: The Inexplicable? Cooperation and Conflict, 2016, vol. 51, no. 1, pp. 3-19.
12. McKeown R. Norm Regress: US Revisionism and the Slow Death of the Torture Norm. International Relations, 2009, vol. 23, no. 1, pp. 5-25.
13. Acharya A. How Ideas Spread: Whose Norms Matter? International Organization, 2004, vol. 58, no. 2, pp. 239-275.
14. Deitelhoff N., Zimmermann L. Things We Lost in the Fire: How Different Types of Contestation Affect the Validity of International Norms. Frankfurt am Main, SSOAR, 2013. 13 p. Available at: https://www.ssoar.info/ssoar/handle/document/45520 (accessed 02.10.2023).
15. Keck M.E., Sikkink K. Activists Beyond Borders, Advocacy Networks in International Politics. New York, Cornel University Press, 1998. 242 p.
16. Powell C. The Role of Transnational Norm Entrepreneurs in the US “War on Terrorism”. Theoretical Inquiries in Law, 2004, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 47-80. Available at: https://doi.org/10.2202/1565-3404.1085
17. Risse T., Ropp S.C., Sikkink K., eds. The Persistent Power of Human Rights. From Commitment to Compliance. Cambridge University Press, 2013. 374 p.
18. Scott S.V., Bloomfield A. Norm Entrepreneurs and Antipreneurs: Chalk and Cheese, or Two Faces of the Same Coin? Bloomfield A., Scott S.V., eds. Norm Antipreneurs and the Politics of Resistance to Global Normative Change. New York, Routledge, 2016, pp. 245-264.
19. Ralph J. What Should Be Done? Pragmatic Constructivist Ethics and the Responsibility to Protect. International Organization, 2018, vol. 72, no. 1, pp. 173-203.
20. Welsh J., Thielking C., MacFarlane S.N. The Responsibility to Protect: Assessing the Report of the International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty. International Journal, 2002, vol. 57, no. 4, pp. 489-512.
21. Šimonovic I. The Responsibility to Protect. United Nations. UN Chronicle, 2016, vol. LIII, no. 4. Available at: https://www.un.org/en/chronicle/article/responsibility-protect (accessed 30.09.2023).
22. Gallagher A.M. A Clash of Responsibilities: Engaging with Realist Critiques of the R2P. Global Responsibility to Protect, 2012, vol. 4, no. 3, pp. 334-357.
23. Staunton E., Glanville L. Selling the Responsibility to Protect: The False Novelty but Real Impact of a Norm. International Studies Review, 2022, vol. 24, no. 3, viac014. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1093/isr/viac014
24. Kagan J.M. The Obligation to Use Force to Stop Acts of Genocide: An Overview of Legal Precedents, Customary Norms, and State Responsibility. San Diego International Law of Journal, 2006, vol. 7, no. 461, pp. 461-489.
25. Dunner T., Staunton E. The Genocide Convention and Cold War Humanitarian Intervention. Bellamy A.J., Dunner T., eds. The Oxford Handbook of the Responsibility to Protect. Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2016, pp. 38-55.
26. Brauman R., Meyran R. Humanitarian Wars? Lies and Brainwashing. London, Hurst & Company, 2019. 120 p.
27. Orford A. International Authority and the Responsibility to Protect. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 2011. 235 p. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511973574
28. Goodman R. Humanitarian Intervention and Pretexts for War. American Journal of International Law, 2006, vol. 100, no. 1, pp. 107-141.
29. Finnemore M. Constructing Norms of Humanitarian Intervention. Betts R. K., ed. Conflict after the Cold War. New York, Routledge, 2015, pp. 272-289.
30. Kolmasova S. Global Assemblage of the Responsibility to Protect. Globalizations, 2022, vol. 19, no. 8, pp. 1328-1345.
31. De Franco C., Meyer C.O., Smith K.E. “Living by Example?” The European Union and the Implementation of the Responsibility to Protect (R2P). JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies, 2015, vol. 53, no. 5, pp. 994-1009.
32. Glanville L., Widmaier W. W. R2P and the Benefits of Norm Ambiguity. Hunt C. T., Orchard P., eds. Constructing the Responsibility to Protect. New York, Routledge, 2020, pp. 50-68.
33. Pison Hindawi C. Decolonizing the Responsibility to Protect: On Pervasive Eurocentrism, Southern Agency and Struggles over Universals. Security Dialogue, 2022, vol. 53, no. 1, pp. 38-56. DOI: 10.1177/09670106211027801
34. Clapp J., Swanston L. Doing Away with Plastic Shopping Bags: International Patterns of Norm Emergence and Policy Implementation. Environmental Politics, 2009, vol. 18, no. 3, pp. 315-332.
35. Mabera F., Spies Y. How Well Does R2P Travel Beyond the West? Bellamy A. J., Dunne T., eds The Oxford Handbook of the Responsibility to Protect. Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2016, pp. 208-226.
36. Mutua M. What is TWAIL? Lovall E., ed. Proceedings of the ASIL Annual Meeting, 2000, vol. 94, pp. 31-38.
37. Abatan E., Spies Y. African Solutions to African Problems? The AU, R2P and Côte d’Ivoire. South African Journal of International Affairs, 2016, vol. 23, no. 1, pp. 21-38.
38. Barnes B.R. Decolonising Research Methodologies: Opportunity and Caution. South African Journal of Psychology, 2018, vol. 48, no. 3, pp. 379-387.
39. Bellamy A.J. R2P – Dead or Alive? Brosig M., ed. The Responsibility to Protect – From Evasive to Reluctant Action? The Role of Global Middle Powers. Johannesburg, HSF, ISS, KAS & SAIIA, 2012, pp. 11-28. Available at: https://www.files.ethz.ch/isn/155245/Full_FromEvasiveReluctantAction.pdf (accessed 01.10.2023).
40. Bose S., Thakur R. The UN Secretary-General and the Forgotten Third R2P Responsibility. Global Responsibility to Protect, 2016, vol. 8, no. 4, pp. 343-365.
41. Istomin I. How Not to Interfere in Another Country’s Domestic Politics. International Affairs, 2022, vol. 98, no. 5, pp. 1677-1694. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1093/ia/iiac191
42. O’Neill J. Building Better Global Economic BRICs. Goldman Sachs Global Economics Paper, 2001, no. 66. Available at: https://www.almendron.com/tribuna/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/build-better-brics.pdf (accessed 01.10.2023).
43. Laïdi Z. The BRICS Against the West? Centre d’études et de Recherches Internationales (CERI-Sciences Po/CNRS). CERI Strategy Paper, 2011, no. 11. Available at: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2315108 (accessed 07.10.2023).
44. Kirton J., Larionova M. The First Fifteen Years of the BRICS. International Organisations Research Journal, 2022, vol. 17, no. 2, pp. 7-30. DOI: 10.17323/1996-7845-2022-02-01
45. Beeson M., Zeng J. The BRICS and Global Governance: China’s Contradictory Role. Third World Quarterly, 2018, vol. 39, no. 10, pp. 1962-1978.
46. Wang A.Х. China’s Leadership in BRICS Governance. International Organisations Research Journal, 2022, vol. 17, no. 2, pp. 50-85. DOI: 10.17323/1996-7845-2022-02-03 Available at: https://iorj.hse.ru/data/2022/10/21/1673516226/3%20Wang.pdf (accessed 07.10.2023).
47. Erthal Abdenur A., Folly M. The New Development Bank and the Institutionalization of the BRICS. BRICS – Studies and Documents. Brasília, Fundação Alexandre de Gusmão, 2015, pp. 77-111.
48. Kishor N., Singh R.P. Study of BRICS Stock Return Volatility During and After Subprime Crisis. International Journal of Business and Globalisation, 2017, vol. 18, no. 2, pp. 233-250. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1504/IJBG.2017.081956
49. Erthal Abdenur A. Can the BRICS Cooperate in International Security? International Organisations Research Journal, 2017, vol. 12, no. 3, pp. 73-95. DOI: 10.17323/1996-7845-2017-03-73
50. Garwood-Gowers A. The BRICS and the “Responsibility to Protect”: Lessons from the Libyan and Syrian Crises. Sancin V., Dine M.K., eds. Responsibility to Protect in Theory and Practice: Papers Presented at the Responsibility to Protect in Theory and Practice Conference. Ljubljana, GV Zalozba, 2013, pp. 291-315.
51. Laskaris S., Kreutz J. Rising Powers and the Responsibility to Protect: Will the Norm Survive in the Age of BRICS? Global Affairs, 2015, vol. 1, no. 2, pp. 149-158. Available at: https://doi.org/10.1080/23340460.2015.1032174
52. Klotz A., Prakash D. Qualitative Methods in International Relations. Basingstoke, Palgrave Macmillan, 2008. 260 p.
Нет комментариев