In March 1999, NATO troops invaded Yugoslavia to stop the massacre of ethnic Albanians. This flagrant violation of sovereignty was illegal – but for many in the international community, it was legitimate. Earlier this week, at an event hosted by the Canadian Lawyers for International Human Rights, Michael Ignatieff explained how he proceeded to spend three years trying to close the gap between legality and legitimacy. Ignatieff was appointed to the United Nations’ mandated International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty (ICISS). In many ways, the Commission was given an impossible task: to square humanitarian intervention within the circle of sovereignty. 

Their solution: The Responsibility to Protect (informally known as R2P). The idea is simple: State sovereignty implies responsibility, and the primarily responsibility of the state is the protection of its people. When a state is unable or unwilling to deliver on this responsibility – be it because of internal war, insurgency, repression or state failure – it is legal for other countries to step in and help. 

R2P proved a creative solution to the dilemma of intervention. But its glory was short-lived – within ten days of the introduction of the concept, the twin towers fell. 

Now, ten years later, R2P has seen a renaissance. UN Resolution 1973 – authorizing the international community to use all means necessary to protect Libyan civilians – marked the first military implementation of the doctrine. The term – which Prime Minister Harper had banned from government departments – is now seeing a revival, finding its way into conversations about Canadian pride. R2P is the new peacekeeping – a symbol of Canada’s role in the world – its proponents contend. Against this backdrop, the man who knows R2P best shares his thoughts.