United States studies show that UN peacekeeping missions are an estimated 8 times more cost-effective than when the US acts alone.
hen I entered the United Nations Secretariat building for the first time as secretary-general in January, my first act was to lay a wreath honoring more than 3,500 UN staff who died in the service of peace.
Later that same week, two Blue Helmets were killed in the Central African Republic, where they were working to prevent violent confrontations between communities from descending into mass killings. UN peacekeepers place themselves in harm’s way every day, between armed groups that are trying to kill each other or to harm civilians.
Countless lives have been saved and improved by UN peacekeeping over the past 70 years; countless families ravaged by war have been given a new start.
Independent research has shown the worth of peacekeeping: it prevents the spread of violence; and it typically reduces the numbers of civilians killed by more than 90 percent, compared to before the deployment.
We also know peacekeeping is cost-effective. The UN peacekeeping budget is less than half of 1 percent of global military spending, and is shared between all 193 UN member states. United States studies show that UN peacekeeping missions are an estimated 8 times more cost-effective than when the US acts alone.
That investment pays off many times over when we consider the economic growth and prosperity that follow from increased stability and security after successful peacekeeping missions.
In our interconnected world, the emergence of global terrorism means that instability anywhere is a threat everywhere. UN peacekeeping operations are on the frontlines of our efforts to prevent the emergence of lawless regions where insecurity, transnational crime and extremism can flourish.
Share your experiences, suggestions, and any issues you've encountered on The Jakarta Post. We're here to listen.
Thank you for sharing your thoughts. We appreciate your feedback.