ABSTRACT
Efforts by international organizations to prevent and punish genocide are hampered by a fundamental tension that exists within international relations, that between sovereignty and responsibility. The principle of sovereignty holds that states are not subject to the authority of any higher institution or principle and that the state itself is the ultimate source of political authority within its territory. Humanitarian intervention to stop genocide usually results in the ultimate assault on state sovereignty: the overthrow of the existing regime and an occupation of the perpetrator's territory by outside forces. The experiences have led to a deluge of scholarly and policy-oriented literature addressing the tension between sovereignty and intervention. Although there is no consensus on how to deal with routine human rights violations committed by states, there is little controversy over the sovereignty/responsibility dilemma when such violations reach the level of genocide.
