This paper examines the apparent contradiction between the international community’s advocacy on responsibility to protect and the unwillingness to take responsibility based action in Darfur. The paper examines the factors responsible for international community’s reluctance in intervening in the Darfur conflict and its implication on Darfurians and the future of humanitarian intervention. We conclude that Darfur’s case shows that there is no correlation between the West’s strategic interest and its humanitarian concerns. Strategic imperative created perceived needs to appease Sudanese government as an important actor in the war of terrorism, while humanitarian concerns suggest the need for greater level of pressure against that government. This implies that we cannot assume that the West strategic interest in preventing state failure; will improve the norm of humanitarian intervention in every case. In the case of Darfur, perceived strategic interests reduced interventionist position.