I'm not so sure I agree with the "do no harm" theory. If somebody gets control of a government and starts doing bad things, at what point is intervention required? Perhaps an example is to compare Hitler and Stalin. Both were terrible dictators and killed millions of people, but in Hitler's case the world cooperated to shut him down, while in Stalin's case the world let it ride. Is that latter model the one we wish to follow? Just let a dictator murder people, because it is too hard for us to agree about the right way to do something about it?

I suppose one can say that yes, the best strategy is to allow each country to run its own internal affairs however it likes, and not worry about what goes on inside. But then one must not listen to whining about the civilian populations of Darfur or North Korea or where-ever--just let them rot.