International Norm or Pretext for Neo-Imperialism: Asymmetric Warfare and State Sovereignty with R2P

The failure of humanitarian protection in cold wars led to introduction of the international norm, R2P; however, its practical application was rhetoric, inconsistent, partial, and neo-imperially driven, which contribute to divergent outcomes of the normative application; and intervention objectives of civilian protection and legitimate humanitarian intervention shift to the erosion of sovereignty or a regime change and normative destruction. Consequently, double erosion i.e., of state sovereignty and normative integrity is faced and the massive atrocities remain constant. This study is done to distinguish the legal application of R2P from neo-imperial ones and their respective consequences on state sovereignty and normative credibility, through comparative case study done by applying the doctrinal legal analysis approach in different land mark cases, thus, contributing to the question of the application of the norm, and the ongoing humanitarian crises in Gaza, Myanmar, and Sudan, which apart from being academic is profoundly consequential.