a) I wish Sumane would not go accommodate the practice of using the term “civil cociety” for NGOs. Civil society is a classical term going back even before Hegel; it stands for those things outside and excluded from the sphere of the state and the sphere of the family. Hence religious institutions, trade unions are civil society when the term is properly used. He knows all this but still accommodates all those NGO fellows trerminologically.

b) Sumane is/was a Marxist but his acceptance of sovereignty and the nation state seems to be in excess of the purely conditional and provisional acceptance that internationalists will grant.

c) The big point: Sumane argues that imperialism should be judged by its motives, true, agreed up to a point. But far more important than motives is consequences. For example imperialism or a Western power may have its own economic or strategic motives for some intervention, or may talk in a haughty and arrogant way; but if the consequences of intervention (political, economic or military) will be to stop genocide, or end the slave trade or prevent some utterly pointless and reactionary tribal war breaking ou, etc, then that aspect could be in overview more important than the motives.
Point to ponder: Majority of Tamils in SL are now pro R2P, majority of Sinhalese anti R2P.