ABSTRACT
The purpose of this chapter is to shed light on the social constitution of the United Nations Security Council and the changes in its normative foundations since the late 1990s. Drawing on empirical evidence from actual Security Council decision-making and other practices, I identify significant changes in the meaning of responsibility since the late 1990s. This includes among others the emergence of the responsibility to protect, the so-called protection agendas on groups such as civilians, women, and children as well as the Council’s consideration of transnational security issues, such as climate change. In doing so, the Council has developed an increasingly cross-cutting understanding of its responsibility that shifts away from its traditional country- and case-based understanding. Two consequences are identified which seem to contradict each other. On the one hand, these changes point to the increasing importance of normative order in the Council, as the changing meaning of responsibility relies on shared understandings about its appropriateness. On the other, this prevents neither inconsistent and incoherent decision-making nor dissent. Instead, it fosters controversy about the appropriateness of these developments. The chapter concludes that focusing on normative controversy is most helpful for understanding the relationship of normative ordering with controversy.
