Ethical debates surrounding the issue of human rights and arms control, are highly contested amongst the global political arena in the 21st century. Despite human rights being an issue for decades, it has become an increasingly prominent topic of discussion and action amongst the international community as a result of human rights violations and advocacy of non-state actors in ensuring governments comply with international human rights laws .The increasing usage of conventional weapons and the development of weapons of mass destruction, has made efforts to control the circulation of arms and addressing disarmament and non-proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, a complex and substantially costly task for the international community. The realist school of thought suggests that the role of a state and its national interest is primary to that of the complex system of global governance. Although, with the rise of third agenda issues such as terrorism and the illegal trading and use of weapons, many suggest that states must engage in diplomacy and work together considering the universality of an individual's human rights and the interests of the global community as a whole, versus the realist approach in order to provide justice for individuals .
States which remain the main global actors, have long been the central force in global politics. However in a complex globalized world with a range of global actors; social, economic and cultural issues can challenge the sovereignty of all states. The Responsibility to Protect doctrine emerged to address growing global challenges to universal human rights and arms control ,stating that humanitarian intervention is both necessary at times and a responsibility of the international community. Libya was the first case where the United Nations Security Council authorized a military intervention against a functioning de jure government citing the Responsibility to protect (R2P). The United Nations Security Council unanimously adopted resolution 1970 on 26 February 2011 following widespread and systematic attacks against the civilian population by the Libyan regime, explicitly referring to the Responsibility to protect. Deploring what it called "the gross and systematic violation of human rights", the United Nations Security Council called for an end to the violence, recalling to Libyan authorities, the responsibility to protect its population including the enforcement of a no fly zone over Libya. This external intervention from the international community directly challenged the sovereignty, interdependence and territorial integrity of the Libyan government which has led scholars to largely overlook the more practical question of whether and how international military action can avert mass atrocities against civilians and provide a long term of justice for individuals. This has led many to some calling into question the United Nations intervention in the Darfur conflict and in similar circumstances ...
