Failure through Consensus Building: Rethinking the Normative Status of the Responsibility to Protect in a Pluralist Global Order

Abstract The status and validity of the Responsibility to Protect (R2P) norm have increasingly come under intense scrutiny given the significant outbreaks and scale of atrocity crimes continuing to occur globally. Yet despite claims of the norm’s inevitable death, there remains broad rhetorical support, with the R2P still frequently invoked by states. In seeking to explain this puzzle, the article focuses on the role of consensus-building practices in shaping normative change, outlining the key drivers of the R2P’s shift toward a less intrusive and more long-term-focused approach to mass atrocity prevention. Building on constructivist research into norm decay, the article argues that this growing emphasis on prioritizing consensus and the continued hybridization of the R2P is in fact further eroding the effectiveness of the norm as it is incorporated into a broader norm cluster, downplaying the R2P’s unique focus as well as reinforcing the centrality of state sovereignty. Consequently, the growing consensus around a co-opted version of the norm has worked to restrict aspects of its application in practice despite increased rhetorical support from member states. The article therefore provides new insights into the role of rising powers in the process of norm shaping in an increasingly pluralist global order. Through this analysis, it is argued that a greater focus on the negative impact consensus-building practices can have on norm status and effectiveness is required in order to help improve understanding of the complex process of norm decay.