Humanitarian intervention and the Responsibility to Protect (R2P) are currently limited and encumbered by a pervasive absence of a political will. In states’ calculations, political considerations are constantly winning-out over the moral considerations of saving at-risk segments of our planet. While institutional and legal reforms undoubtedly play a role in addressing this challenge, such reforms and structures have existed for generations now, and have largely failed to bridge this gap from ‘moral necessity to political action’. What has been lacking is a moral understanding of humanitarian crises that is capable of reliably motivating the international community to undertake remedying actions, rather than merely expressions of concern. Such a moral foundation is achievable through institutional cosmopolitanism, an understanding of humanitarian intervention as satisfactions of our negative duties, and specifically the work of Thomas Pogge.