Wondering about sovereignty

The concept of "Sovereignty" is obviously socially constructed. Apparently it dates from the 14th century, and according to Wikipedia the Treaty of Westphalia codified its "basic principles of territorial integrity, border inviolability, and supremacy of the state (rather than the Church)." According to Joseph Ellis, the Founding Fathers of the United States created the concept of shared sovereignty between a federal government and state governments -- a concept which apparently is being applied in intergovernmental organizations such as the European Union.

In the age of empire, European imperial powers denied that peoples in Africa, Asia and the Americas exercised sovereignty over the lands that they occupied.

Today we talk about "fragile states" and "failed states" recognizing that in such states governments exercise little or no sovereign power.

As I understand it, the creation of the United Nations Security Council represented a social construction of sovereignty to be limited when the community of nations decides that a government of a nation is acting in such a way as to threaten international security. A multinational force can be put in place over the objections of a specific government.

The question I have is whether in places such as the Congo, we should decide to limit sovereignty simply on the basis that the government of that country seems unable to secure the welfare of its citizens.