DOI: 10.36347/sjebm.2020.v07i11.001

Pages: 373-379

Although the responsibility to protect is a new development of the theory of humanitarian intervention, its implementation still needs the authorization of the United Nations Security Council, so it has no legal effect and is only a moral obligation. Under the authorization of the Security Council, NATO implemented the responsibility to protect in Libya, but it eventually overthrew the Gaddafi government, bringing regime change into the responsibility to protect and forming the so-called Libyan model. From the perspective of international norms, NATO’s approach went beyond the mandate of the Security Council, seriously violated Libya’s sovereignty, and ran counter to the concept that “the principle of sovereignty takes precedence over the principle of human rights” advocated by China and Russia. Moreover, NATO’s regime change in Libya had advocated its value concept that “only Western democracy is the most effective guarantee of human rights”. Therefore, when the United States, Europe and other countries tried to implement the responsibility to protect and copy the “Libyan model” in Syria, they were resolutely boycotted by China, Russia and other countries. The current situation of the struggle is that the priority of the principle of sovereignty has been maintained to a large extent, and the diplomatic discourse system and international discourse power of China, Russia and other countries have also been safeguarded.