Sovereignty as Responsibility: Unpacking the doctrine of the 'two sovereignties'

The doctrine Responsibility to Protect (R2P) stems from the idea that there are two opposing notions of sovereignty: an old conception of sovereignty as authority and control; an emerging one interpreting sovereignty as responsibility. R2P advocates stress the evolution from the former to the latter as a key normative change that is currently underway and should be supported through normative entrepreneurship. The paper seeks to problematize such an interpretation of the sovereignty's evolution in three ways. First, it argues that in the modern notion of sovereignty authority and responsibility have always been intertwined, consequently framing the evolution of sovereignty in terms of a dichotomy between authority and responsibility is misleading. Second, the paper points out that both the R2P and the doctrine of 'two sovereignties' is based upon a domestic focus on sovereignty. Such a focus determines an interpretation of state sovereignty in isolation from other sovereignties and, in turn, neglects the international dimension of states' responsibilities, which has always been an essential aspect of modern international relations. Finally, the paper delves into the ambivalent effects raising from the neglect (or even distrust) regarding the authority/control component attached to sovereignty. More specifically, the final part of the paper focuses on dilemmas attached to state-building projects, particularly in war-torn societies where the international responsibility to protect resulted in humanitarian intervention