“President Obama’s failure to get Congress to support airstrikes in Syria, coupled with the vote against military action in the British House of Commons, brings home a key fact about international politics: when given a choice, democratic peoples are reluctant to authorize their leaders to use force to protect civilians in countries far away,” says Michael Ignatieff, a professor at Harvard’s John F. Kennedy School of Government and at the University of Toronto’s Munk School of Global Affairs.
“In 2001, the International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty, on which I served, developed the idea that all states, but especially democracies, have a ‘responsibility to protect’ civilians when they are threatened with mass killing. For those of us who have worked hard to promote this concept, it’s obvious that our idea is facing a crisis of democratic legitimacy,” he writes in The New York Times: [[[[[The core problem is public anger at the manipulation of consent: disillusion with the way in which leaders and policy elites have used moral and humanitarian arguments to extract popular support for the use of force in Iraq and Libya, and then conducted those interventions]]]]]
[ed notes:though most biographies describe ignatieff as a canadian liberal,facts reveal he actually came from zio/neocon carr centre... Michael Ignatieff described himself in a 2007 biographical note as a "a Canadian scholar, writer, journalist and lifelong Liberal." http://web.archive.org/web/20070328191113/http://www.michaelignatieffmp.ca/about.html
He is the former Director of the Carr Center for Human Rights Policy....backround on ziocon carr centre...see... http://thenakedfacts.blogspot.com/2011/07/chomsky-fraud-attacks-chavez-for-necon.html