Humanitarian Intervention and the Responsibility to Protect: Nigeria’s Voting Behaviour at the United Nations Security Council

This study examines Nigeria's voting behaviour and diplomatic positions on humanitarian intervention resolutions at the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) during its elected non-permanent membership periods, assessing the country's engagement with the Responsibility to Protect (R2P) norm. Nigeria has served multiple terms as a non-permanent UNSC member and has had to navigate complex decisions on humanitarian crises in Libya, Syria, Sudan, and elsewhere. Drawing on norm localisation theory and international society perspectives, this research analyses Nigeria's stated rationale for its votes on key UNSC resolutions from 2019 to 2024, examining whether its behaviour reflects principled R2P commitments or strategic calculations. The study employs a qualitative methodology, relying on analysis of UNSC voting records, official Nigerian position statements, diplomatic speeches, and secondary literature. Three case resolutions are selected for in-depth analysis to provide comparative depth. It is anticipated that findings will show that Nigeria's UNSC behaviour is shaped by a combination of African solidarity norms, non-interference principles, and bilateral relationship considerations, leading to inconsistent application of R2P positions. The research contributes to the understanding of emerging powers' engagement with global humanitarian governance norms. Keywords: R2P, humanitarian intervention, UNSC, Nigeria, voting behaviour.