English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

With the end of the civil war and fading of military and ideological competitions of the superpowers and drastic changes in the international system, maintaining peace and security has been closely associated with the political, social economic and cultural structures of states and their behavior in observing the criteria of human rights. The Security Council as an organ, established for keeping Peace and Security has experienced great opposition to the sovereignty of states by using human rights rules as an alibi, and even has paved the way for military intervention. Normally, material breach of the human rights criteria and fundamental liberties can endanger the international peace and security. In this type of situations, the issue can be discussed in the Security Council with the request of the general assembly and the general secretary. IF the Security Council confirms a threat consequent to the material violation of human rights rules, it can enforce the required actions, regarding its obligations and authorities. The intervention of the Security Council as a representative of the international community with regard to taking decisions for humanitarian intervention in the context of the responsibility to protect and denying the absolute sovereignty of states on one hand and encouraging the states to guarantee the observance of civil rights of people and enabling them in the field of public welfare and even military intervention and protecting nations against tragedies such as genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes, on the other hand are significant challenges. Although the responsibility to protect is practiced in the direction of legitimate intervention in the domestic affairs of sovereign nation – states with the objective of protecting humanitarian rules, actually after 2001, the chances for humanitarian measures have been decreased. In this article, we will examine this issue that from the beginning of the third millennium what effects, the concept of responsibility to protect has had by limiting the sovereignty of states and redefining it, aligned with the humanitarian intervention by the Security Council?

Examining of Relationship between Responsibility to Protect & Sovereignty of States in Light of Practice of International Community