Due Date:<\/strong> Initial Post by Thursday 11:59 PM; Replies by Sunday 11:59 PM (Local Time)<\/p>\n Points:<\/strong> 50<\/p>\n Word Count:<\/strong> Initial Post (350\u2013400 words); Replies (150 words each)<\/p>\n International relations theory often struggles to reconcile two competing concepts: state sovereignty and universal human rights. Sovereignty suggests that what happens within a country\u2019s borders is the exclusive business of that state. Human rights advocates argue that the international community has a moral obligation to intervene when a government fails to protect its people. The Responsibility to Protect (R2P) doctrine attempts to bridge this gap, but its application remains inconsistent. We see different responses to crises in places like Libya, Syria, and Ukraine.<\/p>\n Review the readings for Module 4, specifically the sections on the R2P framework. Compose a response that addresses the following prompt:<\/p>\n Is the principle of state sovereignty an outdated obstacle to human security, or does it remain a necessary barrier against imperialism?<\/strong><\/p>\n Support your argument by analyzing one specific historical or contemporary example of humanitarian intervention (or non-intervention). Explain whether the international response in your chosen case was justified and effective. You must cite the textbook and at least one scholarly article from the module resources to support your position.<\/p>\n Academic dialogue relies on constructive critique and the exchange of diverse perspectives. You are required to post two replies to your peers. Your replies should do more than agree or disagree. Ask a probing question about their example or offer a counterpoint based on a different theoretical perspective (e.g., Realism vs. Liberalism).<\/p>\n
\nOverview<\/h3>\n
\nInitial Post Instructions<\/h3>\n
\nParticipation Requirements<\/h3>\n
\nGrading Rubric<\/h3>\n