Final answer:
During the Rwandan Genocide of 1994, the UN was critiqued for its perceived indifference, leading to widespread criticism of the international community's failure to prevent the massacre of around 800,000 people. This prompted the adoption of the R2P principle, emphasizing global responsibility to protect citizens when a state fails to do so.
Step-by-step explanation:
Some questioned the value of UN indifference during the Rwandan Genocide. The United Nations and the United States faced criticism for their lack of decisive action during the 1994 genocide in Rwanda. Despite warnings and evidence of the genocidal massacres primarily targeting the Tutsi minority by the Hutu majority, the international response was limited. The failure of the international community to intervene effectively led to the deaths of approximately 800,000 people over the course of 100 days.
This inaction spurred the philosophy behind the principle of the Responsibility to Protect (R2P), which emerged from the international community's regret over its passivity during crises like those in Rwanda and the former Yugoslavia. R2P asserts that sovereignty not only grants authority but also the obligation to protect the citizens of a state, and if the state fails to do so, the responsibility shifts to the global community.
UN neutrality and the perception of inaction came to be heavily criticized in the aftermath of the Rwandan Genocide, leading to debates on how to respond more effectively to such crises in the future.