You are on page 1of 2

PRO CASE

We Affirm, Resolved: United Nations peacekeepers should have the power to engage in
offensive operations. PKOs is peacekeeping operations.
Point 1: Offensive PKOs Save Lives
Sub Point A: Offensive PKOs Allow Peacekeepers to Protect Themselves
According to LA Times in 2014, peacekeepers are facing increasingly dangerous challenges.
Thus, the UN on October 14, 2014 reports that 3250 peacekeepers have been killed with 839
fatalities due to malicious acts because lack of protection for peacekeepers. The New York Times
in 2014 provides another impact of an increase in the capture of peacekeepers because they are
not able to protect themselves adequately. This is because peacekeepers cannot use force to
protect themselves unless they have been attacked first. Thus, currently, peacekeepers are sent to
dangerous situations and are only allowed to respond to threats rather preventing them. By
authorizing more offensive operations, peacekeepers can neutralize threats before they occur, and
thus defend themselves.
Sub Point B: Offensive PKOs are necessary to Protect Civilians
The UN exists with the responsibility to always help save innocent lives as UN states in 2014, its
top priority is protecting civilians. The UN stresses it must have all paths available in order to
protect civilians. Journal of International Peacekeeping in 2014 explains the UN has a
responsibility to use offensive PKOs as a path to protect civilians in countries with turmoil.
Offensive PKOs are necessary because lack of force is disastrous. US Official News in 2014
reports defensive operation in Congo allowed massacres including M23 rebels executing
at least 44 people. Reuters in 2013 reports, U.N offensive PKOs defeated the M23 rebel
group, the most dangerous in the Congo. The UN offensive force was able to eliminate the group
and still maintain the UN mission showing the need for these operations. Offensive PKOs are
necessary to defend civilians because without them, the UN cannot use force to protect civilians.
Solvency is shown by DRC and the impact is that if the effective approach to saving lives is
offensive PKOs, it is vital for the UN to have this power to defend their top priority. Moreover,
UN should have all options open to save lives and offensive PKOs are an option.
Point 2: Offensive PKOs Solve Genocide
Offensive operations are necessary as they are the only way to stop genocide. Africa Policy
Institute in 2014 explains the defensive PKOs require UN to watch genocide as they cannot
defend civilians. BBC in 2014 states 800,000 people died in the Rwanda genocide and cites the
inability of peacekeepers to take action as a cause. Dr. Nanda states analyses of Bosnia and
Rwanda proves UN offensive PKOs can solve genocide. American Journal of Political Science in
2013 expands as Libya proves UN offensive PKOs resulted in successful prevention of genocide.
This is because the seizure of weapons which is crucial to stopping genocide is not allowed in
the defensive mandate. API explains in 2014 that offensive PKOs allows UN to enforce
international norms to prevent genocide. Thus, offensive PKOs ensure peaceful conditions to
stop genocide. Dr. Reimer states in 2000 stopping genocide is a prerequisite for protecting all

human rights. Global Strategic Analysis expands in 2001 as genocide takes more lives than all
wars combined. Thus to stop genocide, the UN has the obligation to have the power of offensive
operations.
Point 3: Offensive Operations Allow for Cyber-Peacekeeping
Cyber peacekeeping is offensive and can provide massive benefits to UN operations. This is
stated by International Law Studies in 2013 as cyber-attacks shut down enemy operations and
increase effectiveness. This is because it disables the opponents defense networks and has been
successfully been used in the past by the United States. Furthermore, cyber-attacks are much less
destructive so theyre better for a countrys stability and also allow UN peacekeepers to regulate
cyberwarfare. This compounded by the fact that Dr. Beehner from Yale found in 2013 that
offensive PKOs are comparably more successful demonstrates the impact that offensive PKOs
improve upon normal PKOs and can be more efficiently accomplished.