Question about international relations

Critically evaluate the paragraph of a book on World order by Mark Mazower: (p. 395), critically comment: [Speaking about responsibility to protect] “Why Gadhafi and not Tibet?  Or Gaza or Bahrain?  Supporters (of R2P) say a little intervention is better than none.  But that may be quite wrong, and for reasons that go beyond the obvious reproach of double standards.  The main point is that the way leaders treat their people is not the only problem that counts in international affairs.  A world in which violations of human rights trump the sanctity of borders may turn out to produce more wars, more massacres, and more instability.  It may also be less law abiding.  If the history of the past century shows anything, it is that clear legal norms, the empowering of states, and the securing of international stability more generally also serve the cause of human welfare.” 

The course is mainly about making of century and it talks about the global/world order, the answer should be 300 words and please be well organized and well-written.