Politically, the nation-state will always be the highest form of socialization and the psychological framework that most individuals actually identify themselves with—Americans, Zambians, Russians, Kenyan. The nation-state and the theoretical framework envisioned by Thomas Hobbes and other political theorists still holds and for many International realists, such as myself, seem to hold sway and have complete hegemony over other nucleus forms of identification. Even our news reports to Russia having done A or the United States having done B. However, of particular interest is maintaining what is a legal entitlement that nations seem to have and something that should be universally be held such as human rights. In other words, is ‘national sovereignty’ truly a basis for allowing some of the most flagrant abuse of human rights or total waste of country resources by uncouth rulers a legitimate basis for not intervening?