Bad peacekeepers should be imprisoned. And a special place in hell is reserved for people who cover up abuse. That said, "what they're known for" may say more about the controversy-obsessed nature of media that anything. "Peacekeepers keep peace" will not sell, will it? And there are of course certain groups who would rather all authority be removed from the UN so they can operate freely.

> That said, "what they're known for" may say more about the controversy-obsessed nature of media that anything

Yeah, they're a lot like Blackwater that way.

Snark aside, I find it deeply fascinating just how broad a benefit of the doubt UN peacekeepers get, compared to anything that has to do with the US military, or, heaven forbid it, Blackwater. Especially considering that most of what we hear about those organisations is filtered through the very same "controversy-obsessed" media.

> I find it deeply fascinating just how broad a benefit of the doubt UN peacekeepers get, compared to anything that has to do with the US military

Yes, it's really hard to imagine why UN peacekeepers have a bigger benefit of the doubt than a foreigner invading troop. Very hard. \s

Indeed, but consider that these efforts have benefits that are hard to measure, mostly because there's no counterfactual control group. If UN peacekeepers have had their intended effect ('keeping the peace') just once how many lives did that save? How many rapes are avoided? It's unfortunate that we have no other worlds to experiment with and no news channels dedicated to non-events.

I'm not saying UN peacekeepers aren't good; I just don't think it helps their cause to sweep all their glaring disasters under the rug. If the goal is trust, then this strategy seems self-defeating. Better to have transparency and justice.

To be fair, what they are known for to you will depend mostly on what is reported by the media and what gets upvoted on social media sites.