An international responsibility to develop in order to protect? A responsibility too far

The Responsibility to Protect (RtoP) norm has a controversial relationship with development which has led to divisions between both academics and governments. The article differentiates between three camps: minimalist, middle ground, and radical, whilst arguing that the debate is hindered by the lack of data on this specific issue. Helping to address this lacuna, the article puts forward the first thematic analysis on development and mass atrocities in the 21st century. To do this it analyses thirty-seven countries and Human Development Index (HDI) data (1990‒2020) to establish patterns in HDI data for countries that have experienced mass atrocities or for which there were serious concerns of, both with regard to status/absolute positions in the ranking and change/trajectory. It puts forward eight key findings which collectively show that there are no patterns that link mass atrocities, or serious concerns of them taking place, to status, rank, or a particular direction of change. Drawing on these findings, the article defends the minimalist position that the RtoP should not engage with long-term development issues.