I was wondering if you had any specific ideas or evidence on running (neg) a value of protection of life and saying that incursions into national sovereignty in the name of human rights wouldI'll address each one in turn.
a. cause civil war/strife on a level worse than balancing HR and sovereignty
b. weaken the power of the U.N (by losing members etc.) to the point that it can't save lives as effectively
c. possibly damage the human rights which it was trying to protect
a. Call the first claim the "Iraq objection." An invasion in the name of saving the world from weapons of mass destruction and freeing the Iraqi people from the rule of a tyrant has sparked civil war and caused thousands of deaths. The ultimate outcome is still in doubt, but the principle holds: sovereignty isn't just a symbol, but an expression of real power within a territory. The power vacuum that results from an incursion means that new powers will attempt to establish sovereignty, often in a bloodbath, and often along sectarian or ethnic lines. (The chaos after the fall of Communism, especially in Yugoslavia, is a similar historical example.)
b. This is a serious matter. The UN receives 22% of its funding from the United States, which, not surprisingly, also values its sovereign status quite dearly. (John Bolton, anyone?) The tenuous relationship between the US and the UN, exacerbated by Iraq and the scandal of the Annan years, means that the UN's efficacy is always questionable. Were the UN to continue to encroach upon sovereignty, withdrawal by the United States (and other nations) would be highly likely.
c. This is the outcome of a. and b. If the fundamental human right is the right to life, then we must protect sovereignty to preserve life.
I would also add a new point:
d. Rather than creating strife by intervening in a sovereign state, the UN can justify humanitarian intervention in failed states on the grounds that a sovereign state no longer exists. The contemporary view of sovereignty includes legitimacy as a requisite component. Sovereigns have obligations to their citizens and to the citizens of other nations.
For more on these matters, see Law, Power, and the Sovereign State.
Aff's, have at it.