In the Persian article submitted, the morality of justification offered for foreign intervention to defend human rights in other countries is discussed. Primarily contradictory positions in the literatures of international relations are explored. Arguing the positive and negative aspects of foreign intervention to defend human rights, this student of politics sides with the pros of interventionist school, provided that the intervention does not emerge out of egoism and parochial interests. Based upon a new approach to define the state, this author argues in favor of the sovereignty of each and every individual global citizen. That is, he is critical of the taboos created around the sanctity of state. The criticism is to deconstruct the doctrinal principles of Westphalian international system. Instead, the argument condones the cosmopolitan and democratic communitarian values on one hand and Good Governance principles on the other. Of course he thinks that the modern state can play an instrumental role in realizing these values. This however needs the mythological component of nation to be divested from the state. State turns to a funnel-pomp instrument to facilate the sovereignty of citizens at both individual and global levels. Based upon a review of Persian mystical literature, this author found that Persian mythical poems articulated by Great Sages such as Hafez, Sa’di and Molavi support the moral intervention in support of citizenry rights, based on cosmopolitan values. In the meantime, the patriotic stand of Ferdowsi is mixed. Unequivocally, the author is critical of policies violating human rights. Nonetheless, he thinks systematic abuse of citizen rights will ultimately lead to mutual disadvantages for both the Shah and the citizens. He narrates the fall-outs of Jamshid’s tyranny embodied in the succession of a foreign intruder’s namely Zahhak, who is the symbol of bloodthirstiness.