THE RESPONSIBILITY TO PROTECT IN NORMATIVE DEADLOCK: ASEAN’S DILEMMA IN THE ROHINGYA ISSUE
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.24076/wcr6v692Keywords:
Responsibility to protect, Rohingya, ASEAN, Norm, LocalisationAbstract
This article examines the limitations of the Responsibility to Protect (R2P) in Southeast Asia, using the Rohingya crisis in Myanmar as a case study. While ASEAN has formally endorsed R2P, its response to the crisis reveals a persistent gap between normative commitment and institutional capacity. This study investigates how deeply entrenched principles of non-interference and consensus have shaped ASEAN’s reluctance to operationalise protective norms, even amid documented mass atrocities. Drawing on qualitative document analysis and framed within constructivist and norm localisation theories, the article explores both regional and global failures to act. The analysis reveals that ASEAN’s response was fragmented, with individual member states selectively engaging based on domestic interests, and that international inaction further eroded the credibility of R2P. By highlighting the disjuncture between rhetorical acceptance and practical implementation, the article argues for a reinterpretation of sovereignty and a rethinking of institutional mechanisms in order to strengthen atrocity prevention in the region. The study further recommends that ASEAN develop a regional monitoring and early-warning mechanism to enhance timely and coordinated responses to emerging mass-atrocity risks.
References
Nagib, R. A. M. and Anam, S. (2021). “De-extremization Effort through Political Re-education Camps In China: A Case of Uyghur Ethnic Minorities”, Nation State: Journal of International Studies, 4(1), pp. 51 - 72. doi: 10.24076/nsjis.v4i1.517.
Acharya, A. (2004). How ideas spread: Whose norms matter? Norm localization and institutional change in Asian regionalism. International Organization, 58(2), pp. 239–275. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0020818304582024
Bellamy, A. J. (2010). The responsibility to protect—Five years on. Ethics & International Affairs, 24(2), pp.143–169. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1747-7093.2010.00253.x
Chong, A. (2015). ASEAN’s human rights norms: Constructing a legalist identity. The Pacific Review, 28(2), pp. 195–218. https://doi.org/10.1080/09512748.2014.993117
Gareth Evans, M. S. (2001). The Responsibility to Protect. Canada: International Comission on Intervention and State Sovereignty, International Development Research Centre, P. XI
Finnemore, M., & Sikkink, K. (1998). International norm dynamics and political change. International Organization, 52(4), pp. 887–917. https://doi.org/10.1162/002081898550789
Habib, M. (2018). Genocide against the Rohingya: The crisis in Rakhine State, Myanmar. Social Science Review, 35(2), pp. 67–74.
Hafiz, A. (2021). ASEAN and the Responsibility to Protect: The limits of regional norms. International Journal of Law and Management, 63(4), 405–419. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJLMA-11-2020-0301
Ganesan, N. (2023). Myanmar’s 2021 military coup, its impact on domestic politics, and a revolutionary road to democratization? Asian Journal of Peacebuilding, 11(2), pp. 311–329. https://doi.org/10.18588/202311.00a392
Katsumata, H. (2003). Reconstruction of Diplomatic Norms in Southeast Asia: The Case for Strict Adherence to the “ASEAN Way.” Contemporary Southeast Asia, 25(1), pp. 104–121. http://www.jstor.org/stable/25798630
Katzenstein, P. J. (1996). The culture of national security: Norms and identity in world politics. Columbia University Press.
Limsiritong, N. (2017). Why ASEAN fails to play a role in the Rohingya situation from the perspective of the ASEAN Charter. Asian Political Science Review, 1(2), pp. 73–79.
Welsh, J. M. (2013). Norm contestation and the Responsibility to Protect. Global Responsibility to Protect, 5(4), pp. 362–377. https://doi.org/10.1163/1875984X-00504004
Bellamy, A. J. (2015). The responsibility to protect: A defense. Oxford University Press.
Charney, M. W. (2009). A history of modern Burma. Cambridge University Press.
Katzenstein, P. J. (1996). The culture of national security: Norms and identity in world politics. Columbia University Press.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2025 Adli Hazmi, Meltem YIlmaz, Idham Badruzaman
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish articles in this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the Journal of Social Politics and Governance journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY-NC-SA 4.0) that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors can enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or edit it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) before and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.
