Acceso usuarios
Este artículo examina en qué medida el Pacto para el Futuro (AGNU, 2024) habilita condiciones políticas e institucionales para la revitalización de la Responsabilidad de Proteger (R2P) en un escenario internacional marcado por la fragmentación geopolítica, la crisis del multilateralismo y la creciente agencia diplomática del Sur Global. El objetivo central es evaluar si el nuevo ciclo de reformas impulsado en Naciones Unidas (ONU) ofrece una oportunidad histórica para reconfigurar la arquitectura de protección internacional desde un enfoque preventivo, estructural y más representativo. Para ello, se desarrolla un análisis normativo y documental sustentado en tres ejes teóricos: la evolución de la R2P como norma en disputa; los debates sobre fragilidad estatal y limitaciones operativas en contextos de violencia masiva; y la emergencia del Sur Global como productor de normas, discursos y arreglos institucionales en el multilateralismo contemporáneo.
Metodológicamente, el artículo emplea una revisión crítica de resoluciones del Consejo de Seguridad y de la Asamblea General, informes del Secretario General, literatura especializada sobre protección internacional y estudios recientes sobre gobernanza global y agencia del Sur. Este enfoque permite reconstruir la trayectoria de la R2P desde su consagración en la Cumbre Mundial de 2005 hasta su desgaste político posterior al caso de Libia y las reiteradas parálisis del Consejo de Seguridad. Asimismo, permite situar la discusión en relación con los desafíos actuales: la persistencia de crisis prolongadas, la debilidad de capacidades estatales en escenarios de fragilidad estructural, y la utilización estratégica de la soberanía como mecanismo de resistencia frente a la injerencia internacional.
El artículo se estructura en cuatro secciones. La primera contextualiza la evolución conceptual y política de la R2P, destacando los factores que han erosionado su legitimidad práctica. La segunda examina cómo los patrones actuales de fragilidad estatal en el Sur Global exponen la brecha entre la dimensión normativa del principio y su implementación. La tercera analiza el Pacto para el Futuro como marco programático capaz de reorientar la arquitectura de protección internacional, especialmente a la luz de la disputa por el próximo liderazgo de Naciones Unidas y el creciente peso político y regional de América Latina y el Caribe. Finalmente, la cuarta sección propone una Estrategia de Revitalización Institucional que integra mecanismos ya existentes en la ONU —alerta temprana, fortalecimiento estatal, cooperación Sur-Sur y marcos regionales— con el fin de transformar la R2P en una herramienta más preventiva, coordinada y operativa.
Se concluye que la revitalización de la R2P no depende de nuevas normas, sino de la capacidad de reactivar, integrar y politizar estratégicamente instrumentos ya disponibles dentro del sistema multilateral, en un momento en que el Sur Global emerge como actor clave para redefinir los contornos de la protección internacional en el siglo XXI.
This article investigates whether the Pact for the Future (AGNU, 2024) provides a meaningful oppor-tunity to revitalize the Responsibility to Protect (R2P) in a global context marked by geopolitical frag-mentation, institutional fatigue, and growing demands for a more inclusive multilateral order. Since its endorsement in the 2005 World Summit Outcome Document, R2P has oscillated between moments of consensus and episodes of deep political contestation. While the principle was conceived as a framework for preventing and responding to mass atrocity crimes, its legitimacy has been severely undermined since the intervention in Libya (2011) and the subsequent paralysis of the Security Council in address-ing crises in Syria, Yemen, Myanmar and the Sahel. The central objective of this article is therefore to evaluate whether the ongoing reform process associated with the Pact for the Future —combined with an increasingly assertive diplomatic posture from the Global South— can reshape the institutional and political conditions necessary for transforming R2P into a more preventive, coordinated and operation-ally viable principle for the twenty-first century.The research is grounded in a theoretical framework that combines three strands of international rela-tions scholarship. First, it revisits the normative evolution of R2P as a “contested global norm”, drawing on literature that situates the principle within broader debates on norm diffusion, legitimation, and backlash in global governance. Second, it integrates insights from the growing field of fragility studies to understand how structural weaknesses in state capacity, political institutions, and social cohesion shape the environments in which atrocity risks are most likely to escalate. In this regard, the article argues that the very contexts for which R2P was designed—states under persistent fragility—remain at the cen-ter of contemporary protection challenges, yet the principle has not been accompanied by an adequate institutional architecture capable of addressing the structural drivers of risk. Third, the article engages with critical and post-Western approaches that highlight the emergence of the Global South as an active producer of norms, discourses and institutional proposals. This literature helps illuminate how R2P’s fu-ture may depend less on traditional power centers and more on the capacity of Southern regional blocs and coalitions to articulate alternative visions of sovereignty, prevention and multilateral cooperation.Methodologically, the study employs a qualitative, documentary analysis of primary sources, including General Assembly and Security Council resolutions, Secretary-General reports, and policy documents re-lated to the Pact for the Future, in addition to secondary literature on R2P, global governance, and state fragility. This approach enables a reconstruction of R2P’s trajectory over nearly two decades, identifying key turning points in the principle’s political acceptance and institutional use. At the same time, it allows for a systematic comparison between the normative aspirations surrounding R2P and the practice of the Security Council, particularly the contrast between its rhetorical recognition of atrocity risks and its re-current inability to adopt timely and coordinated responses. The methodological strategy is interpretive and analytical, aiming to generate a conceptual and institutional assessment of the conditions under which R2P may regain operational relevance.The article is structured in four main sections. The first offers a conceptual and historical overview of R2P, tracing its emergence from debates on humanitarian intervention in the 1990s to its codification at the 2005 World Summit. It highlights the principle's initial emphasis on state responsibility, international assistance, and timely collective action, while also identifying the sources of subsequent skepticism, par-ticularly concerns related to selectivity, instrumentalization, and the politicization of Security Council de-cision-making. This section also examines how the intervention in Libya became a watershed moment, generating a crisis of legitimacy that transformed how many states, especially those in the Global South, interpret the relationship between sovereignty, protection, and external intervention.The second section analyzes the Pact for the Future as an emerging framework for institutional and normative reconfiguration. While the document does not explicitly mention R2P, it articulates a set of programmatic pillars—structural prevention, strengthening state capacities, expanding early warning systems, strengthening the role of the General Assembly, and promoting South-South and triangular cooperation—that closely align with R2P's original preventive ambitions. The article argues that these convergences constitute a promising, albeit underexplored, starting point for repositioning R2P within a revitalized UN reform agenda. This section also situates this discussion within the political context of the 2027 election for the next Secretary-General, where candidates from Latin America and the Caribbean, such as Michelle Bachelet, Rebeca Grynspan, or Mia Mottley, may favor leadership styles linked to relational diplomacy, develop-ment-oriented prevention, and more inclusive forms of multilateralism—elements that align with a re-newed vision of the Responsibility to Protect.The third section focuses on the empirical dynamics of state fragility in the current international system and its implications for R2P. Drawing on UN policy documents and risk assessments, it shows that many of the most serious protection crises occur in states characterized by chronic institutional weakness, fragmented authority, limited administrative capacity, and recurring exposure to economic and political crises. While these contexts align precisely with the environments for which R2P’s preventive pillar was designed, the principle has not been accompanied by a coherent institutional infrastructure capable of addressing structural vulnerabilities before they escalate into mass violence. The disconnect between the normative expectations placed on R2P and the systemic absence of preventive tools in the UN architec-ture constitutes one of the main obstacles to revitalizing the principle.The fourth section proposes an Institutional Revitalization Strategy (IRS), which integrates existing UN mechanisms (early warning and data analysis platforms, the Office for the Prevention of Genocide, capacity-building frameworks, and regional cooperation agreements) into a more coherent operational ecosystem. Rather than advocating for new legal instruments or coercive tools, the IRS emphasizes in-stitutional integration, information sharing, coordinated prevention, and the importance of strengthening state capacities as prerequisites for effective protection. This strategy also positions the Global South not only as a beneficiary of protection but also as a normative agent capable of contributing to the redesign, monitoring, and implementation of protection frameworks adapted to the realities of the 21st century.The extended analysis presented in the article leads to a broader conclusion: the revitalization of R2P depends not on reinterpreting its legal foundations, but on recalibrating its institutional environment and aligning it with ongoing UN reform efforts. The current moment—characterized by structural transitions in global governance, an increasingly assertive Global South, and the political reconfiguration anticipated by the Pact for the Future—offers a unique window of opportunity to rebuild R2P as a preventive, coop-erative, and context-sensitive norm. Whether this opportunity materializes will depend on the capacity of states and UN actors to articulate a renewed political consensus around structural prevention, shared responsibility, and the collective protection of populations at risk.
