Why do we help people in need? Is it because humans are inherently compassionate creatures or is it because people crave positive reciprocity. Regardless of the actual answer many people in the world lend their hands to people in need in order to give them the support needed to overcome a difficult situation. When one helps someone in need they help facilitate positive encouragement which is needed when someone is down on their luck. It may be the intrinsic feeling of compassion within humans that helps them be more likely to support humanitarianism. Having moral feelings of kindness and sympathy towards all humans is the basis of this concept. Most people do believe in the natural rights of all citizens so it 's difficult to understand why
…show more content…
With the creation of R2P state sovereignty begins to be considered in terms of responsibility for the populace rather than just territory. The conversation that R2P creates is one in which the original ideals of state sovereignty are being challenged and the emergence of a more conscious aim to protect humans and not those who abuse them comes to light. Since the principle advocates the responsibility that the state has in protecting its citizens from things such as crimes against humanity, the priority of a nation shifts to the safety of its people. Changing the focus of the sovereign makes for the population to be less likely to endure human right violations which is ultimately the most important thing. The integration of R2P also makes it so that states are held responsible when failing to protect its citizens. By failing to protect its citizens the nation has failed to complete the duties a sovereign has to fulfill. A sovereign originates with its people and can not be overridden because of it. The implementation of the Responsibility to Act may also help serve as a deterrent of future crimes against humanity. If there is a strong commitment by the international community to R2P then there will be consequences that future dictators or criminals will have to consider. If a future government leader plans on creating future attacks against its …show more content…
Many fear that in enacting R2P outside intervention will become more common and any little excuse will be taken to invade other countries. Concerning as it may be, the creation of Responsibility to protect makes it so that the opposite be the case. In creating R2P there comes a new definition to what the sovereignty is meant to do. With this new creation come the idea of human rights being the primary concern of a population. Having humans come first further reinforces state sovereignty. Outside intervention is another large fear that people have with R2P but the reality is that principles pushes for outside intervention to be a last resort. Its creation was made in order to avoid other states intervention in a conflict by having all the responsibility fall on the host state. As previously stated invention it is a last resort so if it is used it is only because the state has failed the duties a sovereign has to its population. Though initially worrying, the implementation of Responsibility to React makes it so that states number one priority be their people which furthers national sovereignty and prevents outside
With the creation of R2P state sovereignty begins to be considered in terms of responsibility for the populace rather than just territory. The conversation that R2P creates is one in which the original ideals of state sovereignty are being challenged and the emergence of a more conscious aim to protect humans and not those who abuse them comes to light. Since the principle advocates the responsibility that the state has in protecting its citizens from things such as crimes against humanity, the priority of a nation shifts to the safety of its people. Changing the focus of the sovereign makes for the population to be less likely to endure human right violations which is ultimately the most important thing. The integration of R2P also makes it so that states are held responsible when failing to protect its citizens. By failing to protect its citizens the nation has failed to complete the duties a sovereign has to fulfill. A sovereign originates with its people and can not be overridden because of it. The implementation of the Responsibility to Act may also help serve as a deterrent of future crimes against humanity. If there is a strong commitment by the international community to R2P then there will be consequences that future dictators or criminals will have to consider. If a future government leader plans on creating future attacks against its …show more content…
Many fear that in enacting R2P outside intervention will become more common and any little excuse will be taken to invade other countries. Concerning as it may be, the creation of Responsibility to protect makes it so that the opposite be the case. In creating R2P there comes a new definition to what the sovereignty is meant to do. With this new creation come the idea of human rights being the primary concern of a population. Having humans come first further reinforces state sovereignty. Outside intervention is another large fear that people have with R2P but the reality is that principles pushes for outside intervention to be a last resort. Its creation was made in order to avoid other states intervention in a conflict by having all the responsibility fall on the host state. As previously stated invention it is a last resort so if it is used it is only because the state has failed the duties a sovereign has to its population. Though initially worrying, the implementation of Responsibility to React makes it so that states number one priority be their people which furthers national sovereignty and prevents outside