Abstract
China and the EU are two international actors which have clearly differentiated international identities as well as perceptions and ideas about the rules which should guide the international system. In the area of humanitarian intervention to protect civilian populations from violence inflicted by their government, the EU and its member states have frequently defended the right and necessity of the international community to intervene to ensure against genocide. China has on occasion supported such a view, while on other insisting on sovereignty and non-intervention as fundamental norms trumping human rights. This chapter will explore the Chinese view of the principle of Responsibility to Protect and discuss the Chinese reaction to concrete humanitarian crises situations (Syria, Darfur and Libya). It will then compare and contrast with the EU and its member states’ views and explain how China’s norm contestation has influenced the EU’s approach to humanitarian crisis situations.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Notes
- 1.
Economists Mahbub ul Haq and Amartya Sen, from Pakistan and India respectively, conceptualised the concept of human security. They both challenged the traditional relationship between development and economic growth, adding other variables such as poverty, political freedom, health care or education.
- 2.
After the report at the 2005 UN World Summit, the concept has been further developed by the 1674 (2006) and 1894 (2009) Resolution by the UN Security Council.
- 3.
Both fundamental norms were enshrined by Mao Zedong’s view of its “Five Principle of Peaceful Coexistence” (1954), in particular, the mutual respect for sovereignty and territorial integrity, non-aggression, and non-interference in other’s internal affairs, equality and mutual benefit and peaceful coexistence.
- 4.
Three main variables can explain China's strong commitment to both principles. The first one is related to the so-called century of humiliation, a period of Western intervention that affected China’s integrity and independence since 1839 until the end of the Japanese invasion of China (1945). The second motivation is associated with the ideological dimension of China’s Foreign Policy such as Beijing’s anti-imperialist sentiment or the non-alignment movement. Finally, the support to integrity is related to security concerns during the early stages of the Cold War. As stated by Zhong (2014, p. 91), China estimated there was a high risk of intervention by the USA, and as a consequence, Beijing opted for a defensive principle of non-interference. Considering the proxy wars of the Soviet Union and the UN, China was distrustful of any intervention in domestic affairs.
- 5.
Stated at the Remarks to National Committee on U.S.-China Relations. https://2001-2009.state.gov/s/d/former/zoellick/rem/53682.htm.
- 6.
The crisis started between some semi-nomadic groups and pro-Sudanese government Arabic groups in a region comprised of 6 million people and divided into 100 ethnic groups. In February 2003, The Sudan Liberation Movement and the Justice and Equality Movement accused Khartoum of marginalising the less developed region of Darfur, especially after the growing revenues during the oil boom in Sudan, and demanded power-sharing in the government of the nation.
- 7.
Interview in Shanghai, February 2019.
- 8.
The final document specified the exclusions of “any foreign occupation force of any form on any part of Libyan territory”, an idea that was welcomed by the Chinese Foreign Ministry. https://undocs.org/en/S/RES/1973(2011).
- 9.
Interview in Shanghai, February 2019.
- 10.
In Syria, the protests started when opposing groups to President Bashar al-Assad called for the end of the regime and the celebration of elections. The government in Damascus was rapidly supported by Russia, Iran and Hezbollah, while the rebels were backed by a US-led coalition of countries comprised by France, UK, the Netherlands, Australia, Belgium, among others. Although it is not the place to describe the complex conflict in Syria, it is worth mentioning that the war has caused about 500.000 deaths, six million internally displaced refugees, almost 6 million Syrians refugees and 13.1 million people in need of humanitarian assistance.
- 11.
The Resolution 21/26 had the negative vote of Russia, China and Cuba. https://documents-dds-ny.un.org/doc/RESOLUTION/GEN/G12/176/37/PDF/G1217637.pdf?OpenElement.
References
Acharya, A. (2001). Human security: East versus West. International Journal, 56(3), 442–460.
African Union. (1998). African Union charter. Retrieved from http://archive.ipu.org/idd-E/afr_charter.pdf.
Annan, K. (1999). Annual report to general assembly, 1999. Retrieved by https://www.un.org/press/en/1999/19990920.sgsm7136.html.
Barbé, E. (2013). Instituciones, normas y conflictos: los años devorados por las langostas. In Eva Vázque, Dolores Adam, & Noé Cornago (Eds.), El Arreglo Pacífico de Controversias Internacionales. Tirant lo Blanch: Valencia.
Bellamy, A. J., & Wheeler, N. J. (2017). Humanitarian intervention in world politics. In J. Baylis, S. Smith, & P. Owen. The globalization of world politics. An introduction to international relations (pp. 514–528).
Boyle, M. J. (2016). The coming Illiberal order. Survival, 58(2), 35–66.
Brockmeier, S., Kurtz, G., & Junk, J. (2013). Emerging norm and rhetorical tool: Europe and a responsibility to protect. Conflict, Security & Development, 14(4), 429–460.
Dembinksi, M., & Rienold, T. (2011). Libya and the future of the responsibility to protect–African and European perspectives. Peace Research Institute Frankfurt Report. (Vol. 107) (p. 1.30).
European Commission. (2016). Shared vision, common action. A stronger Europe: A global strategy for the European Union’s foreign and security policy. Retrieved from http://eeas.europa.eu/archives/docs/top_stories/pdf/eugs_review_web.pdf.
European Union Statement. (2018). Debate on “the responsibility to protect and the prevention of genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing and crimes against humanity”. Retrieved from https://eeas.europa.eu/delegations/un-new-york/47293/node/47293_ka.
Fabbrini, S. (2014). The dilemmas of an intergovernmental foreign policy: Learning from the European Union’s answer to the Libyan crisis. International Politics, 51(1), 177–195.
Garwood-Gowers, A. (2016). China’s “responsibly protection” concept: re-interpreting the Responsibility to Protect (R2P) and military intervention for humanitarian purposes. Asian Journal of International Law, 6(1), 89–118.
Haas, R. (Jan/Feb 2019). How a world order ends: Wand what comes in its wake. Foreign Affairs, 98(1), 1–22.
Hemmenway, D. (December 21, 2018). Chinese strategic engagement with Assad’s Syria. Atlantic Council. https://www.atlanticcouncil.org/blogs/syriasource/chinese-strategic-engagement-with-assad-s-syria.
House of Commons Foreign Affairs Committee. (2018). Global Britain: The responsibility to protect and humanitarian intervention. Retrieved from https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201719/cmselect/cmfaff/1005/1005.pdf.
Huang, Ch-H. (2017). Peacekeeping contributor profile: The people’s Republic of China. Providing for peace keeping. http://www.providingforpeacekeeping.org/2014/04/03/contributor-profile-china/
Ikenberry, J. (Jan–Feb. 2008). The rise of China and the future of the West: Can the liberal system survive? Foreign Affairs, 87(1), 23–37.
Kagan, R. (2003). Of paradise and power. America and Europe in the new world order. New York: Knopf.
King, T. (1999). Human rights in European Foreign policy: Success or failure for post-modern diplomacy? European Journal of International Law, 19(2), 313–337.
Koenig, N. (2011). The EU and the Libyan crisis: In quest of coherence? Istituto Affari Internazionali.
Kurtz, G., & Rotmann, P. (2016). The evolution of norms of protection: Major powers debate the responsibility to protect. Global Society, 30(1), 3–20.
Liu, T., & Zhang, H. (2014). Debates in China about the responsibility to protect as a developing international norm: A general assessment. Conflict, Security & Development, 14(4), 403–427.
Mallet, J. C. (2008). Defense et securitý. Le Livre Blanc. Retrieved from http://bdc.aege.fr/public/Defense_et_securite_nationale_Livre_Blanc.pdf.
Manners, I. (2002). Normative power Europe: A contradiction in terms? Journal of Common Market Studies, 40, 235–258.
Manners, I. (2008). The normative ethics of the European Union. International Affairs, 84(1), 1–16.
March, J. G., & Olsen, J. P. (2011). The logic of appropriateness. In R. E. Goodin (Ed.), The oxford handbook of political science (pp. 478–495). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Ministry of Foreign Affairs. (2004). Ambassador Li baodong chairs security council meeting on Libya. Retrieved from http://www.china-un.org/eng/zt/sccn201103/t809816.htm.
Ministry of Foreign Affairs. (2018). Counter-terrorism, dialogue and reconstruction are three key points for solving syrian issue at new stage. Retrieved from https://www.fmprc.gov.cn/mfa_eng/zxxx_662805/t1514519.shtml.
Miskimmon, A. (2012). German Foreign policy and the Libya crisis. German Politics, 21(4), 392–410.
Panda, A. (2014, June 26th). “Reflecting on China’s five principles, 60 years later”. The Diplomat. https://thediplomat.com/2014/06/reflecting-on-chinas-five-principles-60-years-later/.
Ramani, S. (September 22, 2016). China’s Syria agenda. The Diplomat. https://thediplomat.com/2016/09/chinas-syria-agenda/.
Security Council. (2004). S/PV.5040. Retrieved from https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.5040.
Security Council. (2006a). Resolution 1674. Retrieved from https://www.un.org/press/en/1999/19990920.sgsm7136.html.
Security Council. (2006b). S/PV.5520. Retrieved from https://undocs.org/en/S/PV.5520.
Security Council. (2011). Resolution 1970. Retrieved from http://unscr.com/en/resolutions/1970.
Security Council Meeting. (2011). SC/10403. Retrieved from https://www.un.org/press/en/2011/sc10403.doc.htm.
Shesterinina, A. (2016). Evolving norms of protection: China, Libya and the problem of intervention in armed conflict. Cambridge Review of International Affairs, 29(3), 812–830.
Slaughter, A. (2006). A new U.N. for a new Century. Fordham Law Review, 74(6).
Smith, K. (2018). The EU and the responsibility to protect in a illiberal era. Dahrendorf Forum. Working Paper nº3.
Thakur, R. (2006). The United Nations, peace and security. From collective security to the responsibility to protect. New York: Cambridge University Press.
United Nations Human Rights Office. (2004). Press Release. Retrieved from https://www.un.org/press/en/2004/afr921.doc.htm.
Whitman, R. (2011). Normative power Europe. Empirical and theoretical perspectives. New York: Palgrave McMillan.
Wiener, A. (2014). A Theory of Contestation. London: Springer.
World Bank. (2018). Belt and road initiative. Retrieved from https://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/regional-integration/brief/belt-and-road-initiative.
Zhong, Z. (2014). Ideational divergences between European Union and China: cases of international interventions. Doctoral Dissertation. Luis Guido Carli University and Université Libre de Bruxelles.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2020 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
López i Vidal, L. (2020). China Contestation of the EU’s Promotion of the Responsibility to Protect: Between Solidarists and Sovereignists. In: Johansson-Nogués, E., Vlaskamp, M., Barbé, E. (eds) European Union Contested. Norm Research in International Relations. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-33238-9_4
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-33238-9_4
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-33237-2
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-33238-9
eBook Packages: Political Science and International StudiesPolitical Science and International Studies (R0)