"National sovereignty is an obligation as well as an entitlement. A government that will not perform the role of a government forfeits the rights of a government"

Richard Perle’s statement challenges the conventional understanding of national sovereignty, contending that it functions not merely as an inherent right but as a duty-laden responsibility. Sovereignty is traditionally regarded as the supreme authority of a state to govern itself without external interference. However, Perle emphasizes that this authority carries reciprocal obligations. A government is entrusted with sovereignty because it is expected to fulfill the essential functions of governance: maintaining order, protecting citizens, upholding laws, and representing the collective will and welfare of the people.

Perle introduces a conditional framework for sovereignty, contending that if a government repeatedly fails or refuses to serve its essential role, it effectively nullifies its claim to sovereign legitimacy. By neglecting or abdicating its responsibilities, whether by systematic incompetence, willful oppression, or gross failure to provide security and basic services, the government loses the very foundation upon which its immunity from external scrutiny or intervention stands. Sovereignty, therefore, is not an impenetrable shield that persists regardless of a regime’s conduct; it is contingent on the performance of core state functions.

The implications are profound for international relations and humanitarian interventions. Perle’s argument offers a moral and possibly legal justification for the international community to intervene in cases where a government is manifestly failing its people. Situations involving failed states, genocide, or widespread humanitarian crises are cited as examples where the forfeiture of sovereign rights may come into play. The perspective advanced here aligns with emerging doctrines like the Responsibility to Protect (R2P), recognizing that the rights of a state cannot be separated from its duties to its citizens. Ultimately, Perle’s assertion challenges leaders to recognize that the privilege of sovereignty must be earned and continually maintained, not simply claimed as an entitlement immune from external accountability.