I determined to focus on ‘Why humanitarian intervention did not take place in Syria?’ Here I would like to underline the complexity of politics which surrounds humanitarian intervention. For example strategic interests of China and Russia which push them to veto UNSC resolution. On the other hand I am going to examine the both humanitarian and political reasons of states which lead them support intervention. My thesis will be interests of states more important than human lives. In this essay firstly I would like to examine the debate of humanitarian intervention definition whether it is possible to examine EU economic sanctions on Syria under Responsibility to protect doctrine ? As you know responsibility to protect is different from humanitarian intervention and based on three principles. According to third principle ‘If the state manifestly fails to protect its citizens mass atrocities and peaceful measures have failed, the international community has the responsibility to intervene through coercive measures such as economic sanctions. Military intervention is considered the last resort.’ Is it possible to argue that under the terms of responsibility to protect in one sense humanitarian intervention took place in Syria? In short this is the summary of what I want.