The prospects for moving from principle to practice are more promising than ever before, but many doubts and uncertainties remain. The path ahead is neither certain nor easy. As the official at the United Nations (UN) charged with moving from words to deeds by developing the conceptual, political and institutional dimensions of the Responsibility to Protect (RtoP), I can attest to how urgently we need the best critical thinking on these matters from around the world. Your ideas, analysis and suggestions are most welcome as together we work to carve a sensible and successful path forward through largely unexplored and uncharted territory. Let me begin today by making some observations about the origins and evolution of RtoP to date, about where we are at this juncture, and finally about the immediate steps ahead.

At the outset, let us recall that RtoP was the product of human experience, not political theory. It is, therefore, an immensely practical idea. The goal is changed behaviour, not better strategies, debates or resolutions. All of the latter may be required to produce the former, but they are not ends in themselves. So we should not take too much comfort from the political and bureaucratic progress we seem to be making in New York. Eventually, progress will be measured in capitals and in the field, not in UN conference halls. Stopping atrocity crimes is a moral imperative, not a policy preference. We should not be condemned to repeat the greatest sins of the twentieth century in the twenty-first. We need to make sure that there will be no more Holocausts, Cambodian killing fields, Rwandan genocides or Srebrenicastyle mass murders. When it comes to these ends, we should all be on the same side of the table. Increasingly, that seems to be the case. Among the UN's 193 Member States, there are legitimate and healthy differences on means, even within a broadbased consensus on what we are trying to achieve.

The RtoP is an important innovation, not a radical departure. It is based on the existing body of law, not on novel theories. To the extent possible, the Secretary- General's implementation strategy seeks to use existing tools, procedures and institutions, rather than invent new ones.