Bringing the Non-Coercive Dimensions of R2P to the Fore

The ethnic violence following the 2007 presidential elections in Kenya led to a wide array of regional and international mediation efforts and diplomatic initiatives, which resulted in a power-sharing agreement and a constitutional process. That these events in Kenya have been called by some the first test case for the Responsibility to Protect (R2P) is not without irony: over the course of these international efforts, R2P was only marginally invoked. It was rather post-hoc framing of this case that brought the non-coercive elements of R2P into the limelight and turned Kenya into an R2P case. This, however, impacted the further development of R2P in two ways. First, references to the experiences in Kenya proved to be an effective frame for actors highlighting, in the run-up to the 2009 United Nations General Assembly debate, the value of preventive and diplomatic initiatives. Second, experiences in Kenya facilitated the inclusion of the procedures of the International Criminal Court in the toolbox of the wider norms of protection, though they remain controversial for some actors.