Divergent Interpretations of the R2P and Human Security: Implications for Governance Challenges in Myanmar 80               Brendan Howe  The differences between “Asian” and “Western” understandings of human security, the responsibility to protect, and the relationship between these concepts have led to radically different policy proposals for engaging “rogue” regimes. Essentially the “West” holds a narrow view of human security, but an interventionary interpretation of R2P, with the two being closely linked; whereas in Asia the linkage between the two is rejected, and a broad conceptualization of human security, along with a non-interventionary understanding of the R2P dominates. This paper first addresses evidence of competing epistemological frameworks upon policy-formation in Western and Asian champions of human security and the R2P. It then assesses the impact of these policy orientations in Myanmar (one of the most governance-challenged states in the world), followed by policy prescription for ongoing challenges in the country and wider region. The findings of this article are that the combination of Western interventionary pressures, with Asian non-judgmental engagement, creates the best conditions to facilitate governance transformation within a target state. Pressure from the West creates incentives not only for the target state to accept help, but also for Asian actors to offer it; while Asian offers of assistance are more readily accepted due to their anti-interventionary legacy. Key Words: Responsibility to Protect (R2P), Human Security, Governance, Myanmar, Western perspectives, Asian perspectives, Nargis, Rohingya.  In 2005, United States Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice identified six authoritarian states as “outposts of tyranny” and, using the language of human security, “fear societies.” These included two states in the East Asian region; North Korea and the military dominated regime in Myanmar. Human security and the Responsibility to Protect (R2P) have been at the center of debates concerning how to engage such “rogue” regimes, and best provide safe havens for their people. The differences between “Asian” and “Western” understandings have led to radically different policy The Korean Journal of Security Affairs, 23-1 (June 2018) pp. 80-101.