This article discusses how the Responsibility to Protect (R2P) doctrine can evolve within a shifting global order, marked by multipolarity and declining liberal norms. It identifies three main challenges: sovereignty, selective implementation, and the use of veto power. Although R2P frames sovereignty as a responsibility, resistance from non-Western powers like China and Russia underscores the need to integrate diverse perspectives on state sovereignty, reflecting these countries' growing influence in international norms. This resistance has exposed the fragile consensus around R2P within the United Nations, as inconsistent application has led to scepticism and diminished credibility. To sustain R2P's relevance, the article proposes adapting the doctrine to align with geopolitical realities, advocating a nuanced approach that respects varied views on intervention while encouraging accountability in veto use for atrocity prevention. In doing so, it offers pathways for R2P to retain its humanitarian goals amid the complexities of a multipolar world.