final part essay Thank you a lot for the correction!! The “return of the state” apart from the economic field, it might take place as well in security issues since states can proceed on a discretional basis. As Alvarez mentions this is the case of states, which in name of national protection might do what it is not explicitly forbidden and have discretion respect to even such well-established regimes as those regarding military occupation. But even in this case, we have to make a distinction as the author does, depending on the geographical standpoint of the state at issue. If we talk about military intervention, from the author’s point of view, it could have been as a way of showing self-governance and sovereign defense of its citizens. This could be the case of the United States and its allies in 2003 with the military intervention which had the aim to disarm Iraq of weapons of mass destruction in the name of national and, to one extend, international security. On the opposite, from the Iraqi position, it suggests that state sovereignty have declined as the state was no longer able to ensure the protection of their civilians in the bombings. Indeed, the worldwide acceptance of humanitarian intervention indicates that the Westphalian sovereignty is in decline and may be considered an outdated concept. This is because respect for state sovereignty has been overshadowed by the growing conviction that there are principles which all states should follow as far as individuals’ human rights are concerned. This is based on the belief that the inherent rights of an individual are morally superior to the state’s sovereignty so that humanitarian intervention might take place. States, which defend that state sovereignty always trumps, even in humanitarian emergencies, as I see it, have a wrong conception since the sovereignty of a state should not stand higher than fundamental human rights. What is more, in a globalized word, states do not just care about its own citizens, but also they try to make respect human rights of individuals in general; they do not take into account its borders limitations but people’s human rights (or at least is one of the arguments they use for humanitarian intervention).