Since the end of the Cold War, there has been an escalation of demands for United Nations (UN) intervention, mostly in situations of convoluted internal conflict that require complex and novel peacekeeping operations. Such internal conflicts are not limited to their boundaries but also affect entire regions through the displacement of persons as well as the flow of arms and resources. This generally requires both a regional and an international response. The international legitimacy of a UN peacekeeping operation is usually derived from obtaining a mandate from the UN Security Council. The uniquely broad representation of member states that contribute personnel and funding to UN operations strengthens this international legitimacy. So, too, does the fact that UN peacekeeping operations are directed by the UN Secretary-General, an impartial and well-respected international figure who is committed to upholding the principles and purposes of the UN Charter.

Since 1989, the UN has established more than thirty new peacekeeping operations, which contrasts with the fifteen instituted in the previous forty-one years. These growing commitments have stretched to the limit the capacity of the UN for effective response. The surge in UN peacekeeping activity has come at a cost. Few current UN peacekeeping missions enjoy a full degree of support and attention from member states and the UN, particularly in terms of reflection and review of strategy, policy, and effective public communications.