The Responsibility to Protect Doctrine: The Gap Between Expectations and Realities

The inability of the international community to face seriously with Widespread and organized human rights violations as well as difficulties in and justifying the legal foundations of humanitarian intervention triggered a doctrine of "Responsibility to Protect" doctrine. In the light of the modification of the "principle of non-interference" and the attempt to redefine the concept of "national sovereignty", the main idea of this doctrine is that as a result of the development of international human rights norms and the idea of "Human Security", sovereignty assumes the primary responsibility of protecting its citizens that in the event of unwillingness or inability to act, the international community is responsible. This article from the perspective of international relations and based on a descriptive-analytical method, answers the question that what challenges does the effectiveness of the doctrine of protectionist responsibility face? the responsibility to protect doctrine? The hypothesis of the present article is that doubts about the meaning and nature of this doctrine, the possibility of using it as a tool to intervene in states, as well as its weaknesses in the implementation phase, are the most important challenges of the doctrine of responsibility to protect. In the light of this critique, this article concludes that the complexities and conceptual conflicts, as well as the practical challenges of implementing this doctrine, have cast doubt on its effectiveness in establishing a new international order and the dynamics of international relations in the face of human rights crises.