The helmets may be blue, but the blood's still red: The dilemma of U.S. participation in UN peace operations

Abstract

United Nations peace operations have achieved unprecedented prominence in the post‐cold war world, but uncertainties and contradictions in US. policy have undermined Washington's participation in these actions and obscured their contribution to US. global objectives. The US. debate on peace operations must transcend the fleeting presence of individual incidents, see beyond the discursive detours that now twist policies, and focus on longer range goals to guide U.S. beahvior. By taking steps to articulate principles that persuasively explain the purpose and value of participation in UN peace operations, the United States will be able to exhibit more resilience in its commitment to peacefully resolve conflict in contemporary international affairs. These steps include recognizing the disparate nature of peace operations, developing clear linkages between peace operatons and U.S. policy goals, and highlighting (both individually and comparatively) the unique characteristics of peace operations as a military mission. While participating in UN peace operations will remain contentious within the United States, the attendant policy debate will possess a more progressive quality if Washington improves its decision‐making frameworks for creating policies that govern the US. role in such actions.