Multiple Principles for Multilateral Interventions: The Ideational Divergences between EU and China

The efficiency and credibility of UN multilateral framework on international intervention is challenged by the fact that international actors hold contrasting positions and principles. The paper first displays recent cases of Darfur, Libya and Syria, in which the EU and its member states are more inclined to intervene when a humanitarian crisis occurs, whereas China often falls behind and occasionally runs counter to a proposal for intervention in the UN. The conventional wisdom often attributes their policies to the pursuit of material national interests. However, after the further investigation of their preferred principles: Non-Interference in Domestic Affairs and Responsibility to Protect, I suggest that, only take ideational factors such as norms and principles into account we can resolve empirical anomalies in specific cases where China or EU lacks sufficient economic and geopolitical motivations.