ABSTRACT
The negative attitude of China toward appeals for intervention in North Korea and Myanmar has brought about the question that has been the staple of scholarly and policy debate since China has risen and become the most competitive great power: Is China adjusting itself to the status quo? Alternatively, is it bringing challenges and even threats to the current international order? This study focuses on the controversial issue of international intervention. Intervention through the use of coercion has caused arguments in the conventional understanding of the fundamental principle of international society: sovereignty of state. As Finnemore (2009, 7) argued, the application of military intervention provides a good analytical point for examining the flow of ideas regarding sovereignty and war, meaning of peace, and genealogy of legitimate use of force in the international system. The undeniable reality is that whether international intervention for “justice” can override the principle of sovereignty is still debatable. Understanding the root of the debate must start from how states define “justice,” how they evaluate the conflicting institutions, and, more importantly, how states further legitimatize and prioritize certain principles or norms. The answers to these questions signify the views of the states of the international and world orders.
